13 World Champions on the start list – two very WOC Middle relevant races: The ‘3 jours du Haut Jura 2012′ is a race worth taking a closer look at. Saturday’s middle distance had Philippe Adamski and Sara Lüscher on top – Monday’s middle distance had Mats Haldin and Helena Jansson on top.

These were training races for many of the runners, whereas it was a WOC selection race for France, Finland and Czech Republic – so you should not read too much out of the results. Still it is notable to see that European champions from last week in Sweden Olav Lundanes and Simone Niggli are beaten both days.

Lundanes says to the orientering.no that he did the biggest mistake of the year, and still does not understand what he did out there. Note however that Lundanes was faster than Adamski on the rest of the course – and that Adamski did not have a perfect race either.

GPS-analysis in 2DRerun

Open the links below to take a look at the race in 2DRerun:

• Middle Saturday M21E in 2DRerun (map only) – results with splits – see all routes from the race here
• Middle Monday M21E in 2DRerun (map only) – results with splits – see all routes from the race here

Thanks to Francois Gonon and Matthieu Puech for preparing the race in 2DRerun.

Results Saturday

Men

  1. Philippe ADAMSKI       85  FRA                T.A.D.                35:02
  2. Frédéric TRANCHAND     88  FRA                OE42                  35:18
  3. Fabian Hertner         85  SUI                OLV Baselland         35:22
  4. François GONON         79  FRA                O JURA                35:36
  5. Jan Prochazka          84  CZE                                      36:00
  6. Jonne Lehto            84  FIN                                      36:44
  7. Olav Lundanes          87  NOR                                      36:57
  8. Audun Weltzien         83  NOR                IFK Göteborg          37:02
  9. Jere Pajunen           86  FIN                Kalevan Rasti         37:13
 10. Lucas BASSET           91  FRA                CSMR                  37:32
 11. Olli-Markus Taivainen  89  FIN                                      37:44
 12. Hannu Airila           85  FIN                Kalevan Rasti         38:08
 12. Baptiste Rollier       82  SUI                ANCO                  38:08
 14. Vincent COUPAT         86  FRA                OTB                   38:19
 15. Mats Haldin            75  FIN                                      38:30
 16. Stepan Kodeda          88  CZE                                      38:34
 17. Andreas Kyburz         88  SUI                OLK Fricktal          39:00
 18. Tero Föhr              80  FIN                                      39:13
 19. Philipp Sauter         89  SUI                OLG Chur              39:19
 20. Vojtich Kral           88  CZE                                      39:20

Women

  1. Sara Lüscher           86  SUI                OLC Kapreolo          34:35
  2. Simone Niggli          78  SUI                OLV Hindelbank        34:41
  3. Venla Niemi            90  FIN                                      35:07
  4. Helena Jansson         85  SWE                Leksands OK           35:15
  5. Katri Lindeqvist       80  FIN                                      35:22
  6. Saila Kinni            87  FIN                                      35:38
  7. Monika Topinkova       80  CZE                                      35:39
  8. Sofia Haajanen         87  FIN                                      36:20
  9. Vendula Klechova       81  CZE                                      36:25
 10. Rahel Friederich       86  SUI                OLG Basel             36:28
 11. Mari Fasting           85  NOR                                      36:45
 12. Amélie CHATAING        86  FRA                NOSE                  37:30
 13. Eva Jurenikova         78  CZE                                      37:31
 14. Minna Kauppi           82  FIN                                      37:52
 15. Bettina Aebi           90  SUI                OLG Herzogenbuchsee   37:56
 16. Dana Safka Brozkova    81  CZE                                      38:18
 17. Brigitta Mathys        90  SUI                ol.biel.seeland       38:21
 18. Lenka Poklopova        89  CZE                                      38:55
 19. Céline DODIN           79  FRA                HVO                   38:56
 20. Judith Wyder           88  SUI                OLG Thun              38:59

Results Monday

Men

  1. Mats Haldin            75  FIN                                      33:33
  2. Fabian Hertner         85  SUI                OLV Baselland         33:34
  3. François GONON         79  FRA                O JURA                33:51
  4. Baptiste Rollier       82  SUI                ANCO                  33:59
  5. Hannu Airila           85  FIN                Kalevan Rasti         34:07
  6. Philippe ADAMSKI       85  FRA                T.A.D.                34:16
  7. Audun Weltzien         83  NOR                IFK Göteborg          34:44
  8. Jarkko Huovila         75  FIN                Kalevan Rasti         34:53
  9. Andreas Kyburz         88  SUI                OLK Fricktal          35:13
 10. Florian Howald         91  SUI                OLG Herzogenbuchsee   35:17
 10. Martin Hubmann         89  SUI                OL Regio Wil          35:17
 12. Vincent COUPAT         86  FRA                OTB                   35:20
 13. Olav Lundanes          87  NOR                                      35:21
 14. Pavel Kubat            91  CZE                                      35:25
 15. Milos Nykodym          90  CZE                                      35:26
 16. Jonne Lehto            84  FIN                                      35:53
 17. Tero Föhr              80  FIN                                      36:08
 18. Jan Prochazka          84  CZE                                      36:17
 19. Jere Pajunen           86  FIN                Kalevan Rasti         36:20
 20. Matthias Kyburz        90  SUI                OLK Fricktal          36:37

Women

  1. Helena Jansson         85  SWE                Leksands OK           32:32
  2. Minna Kauppi           82  FIN                                      32:34
  3. Simone Niggli          78  SUI                OLV Hindelbank        33:22
  4. Rahel Friederich       86  SUI                OLG Basel             35:04
  5. Saila Kinni            87  FIN                                      35:36
  6. Dana Safka Brozkova    81  CZE                                      36:14
  7. Vendula Klechova       81  CZE                                      36:32
  8. Amélie CHATAING        86  FRA                NOSE                  37:06
  9. Sofia Haajanen         87  FIN                                      37:27
 10. Céline DODIN           79  FRA                HVO                   37:51
 11. Venla Niemi            90  FIN                                      38:02
 12. Isabelle Feer          90  SUI                OLG Goldau            38:04
 13. Katri Lindeqvist       80  FIN                                      39:02
 14. Iveta Duchova          86  CZE                                      39:07
 15. Denisa Kosova          91  CZE                                      40:03
 15. Sophie Tritschler      90  SUI                OLG Zürich            40:03
 17. Martina Seiterle       89  SUI                thurgorienta          40:28
 18. Eva Jurenikova         78  CZE                                      40:35
 19. Sara Lüscher           86  SUI                OLC Kapreolo          41:09
 20. Léa VERCELLOTTI        89  FRA                OTB                   41:18

A tough long distance with many long legs with route choice options – that were some of the ingredients in today’s long distance final at the European Championships in Skattungbyn, Sweden.

An important note about the illustrations: All time on the illustrations are GPS-times, i.e. not official split times. Thus time may be off by 5-10 seconds in some cases. For statistical analysis with many runners like presented in most of the illustrations, these offsets are considered to be not significantly alter the overall analysis in most cases. However, there may be cases where the conclusion could be slightly altered by using actual split times. Please add a comment below if you spot such cases, and the article will be updated accordingly.

This article is part of the EOC 2012 GPS-analysis series. In a cooperation with the EOC 2012organizers, World of O/O-training.net will do GPS-analysis after each of the EOC races in Sweden the coming week.

Analysis done in 2DRerun

The analysis in done using 2DRerun. You can make your own analysis of the EOC long distance in 2DRerun using the links above (note! long loading time as many routes must be loaded).

• Men’s long distance in 2DRerun
• Men’s long distance in 2DRerun

As a background for this article, you can use the map without any routes drawn – see the men’s map here and the women’s map here.

Men 2-3

The men’s course started with two short, technical legs before heading off on the first route choice leg to control number three:

The leg to number three offered three main route choices – direct (around 1 km), left (around 50 meters longer) and right (around 150 meter longer than the direct choice). The direct route gave you a lot of marsh-running – the marshes being quite wet in this area. The right route gave you 150 meter on a road and 400 meter of a path – thus allowing you to hold higher speed than on the alternatives.

Based on the routes run (see below), most of the good times are run to the right. There is also significantly less variance in the times, i.e. few poor times – a clear indication that the risk is lower on this route. On the other hand, the best time run on the left route is not much slower than the best time on the right route. Here both gold and silver medalists Lundanes and Merz went left. Novikov started out left, then changed his mind and went left. This lost him more time than would have been lost by just continuing right…

Men A-final: 2-3 (Legtimes)

1.	Ionut Alin Zinca	5:56	+0:00
2.	Fredrik Johansson	5:58	+0:02
3.	Audun Hultgreen Weltzien	6:10	+0:14
4.	Edgars Bertuks	6:13	+0:17
5.	Mikhail Mamleev	6:14	+0:18
6.	Jan Prochazka	6:14	+0:18
7.	Frédéric Tranchand	6:14	+0:18
8.	Olav Lundanes	6:16	+0:20
9.	Milos Nykodym	6:18	+0:22
10.	Matthias Merz	6:21	+0:25
12.	Valentin Novikov	6:24	+0:28

Even if loosing time on number three, Lundanes is in the lead at control 3 due to a very good start in the two first legs:

Men A-final: 2-3 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	9:29	+0:00
2.	Mikhail Mamleev	9:35	+0:06
3.	Matthias Merz	9:41	+0:12
4.	Ionut Alin Zinca	9:47	+0:18
5.	Edgars Bertuks	9:49	+0:20
6.	Anders Nordberg	9:52	+0:23
7.	Gernot Kerschbaumer	9:52	+0:23
8.	Valentin Novikov	9:52	+0:23
9.	Matthias Müller	9:54	+0:25
10.	Oleksandr Kratov	9:58	+0:29

Men 4-5

The next long leg was the leg from number 4 to number 5. This was a longer leg – but with less distinct route choices. Still it proved to be a leg which made a difference on the top of the results list.

There are basically three main alternatives – direct (blue above) which is the shortest run by Lundanes. Left (red above, run by Novikov) which exploits a small path on part of the leg – paying with another 40-50 meters of running and right (orange above, run by Lauenstein) which has some road and path running – but being around 100 meters longer.

As you see from the comparisons below, the right variant takes you too far from the line without giving significantly better runnability – the runners are parallell when Lauenstein leaves the path, but Lauenstein then has further to run to the control.

The left and direct variants are very equal – the last part into the control is what makes the difference between Lundanes and Novikov.

Men A-final: 4-5 (Legtimes)

1.	Valentin Novikov	7:36	+0:00
2.	Anders Nordberg	7:49	+0:13
3.	Olav Lundanes	7:50	+0:14
4.	Matthias Merz	7:54	+0:18
5.	Johan Runesson	7:54	+0:18
6.	Oleksandr Kratov	7:57	+0:21
7.	Marc Lauenstein	7:59	+0:23
8.	Olle Kärner	8:00	+0:24
9.	Martins Sirmais	8:04	+0:28
10.	Fredrik Johansson	8:07	+0:31

Men A-final: 4-5 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	18:20	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	18:32	+0:12
3.	Matthias Merz	18:41	+0:21
4.	Anders Nordberg	18:47	+0:27
5.	Oleksandr Kratov	19:00	+0:40
6.	Fredrik Johansson	19:13	+0:53
7.	Gernot Kerschbaumer	19:13	+0:53
8.	Martins Sirmais	19:16	+0:56
9.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	19:18	+0:58
10.	Mikhail Mamleev	19:20	+1:00

This leg from 4 to 5 is one of the deciding legs in the race – already here we have Lundanes, Novikov and Merz on top of the results list. These three also run 3 of the 4 best times on the leg.

Men 5-6

The leg from 5-6 gave a surprisingly wide spreading of routechoices – considering that there is fairly good runnability and relatively easy orienteering when staying close to the line. Below the main alternatives run are drawn. The around 20 top times are run on the three most direct variants – which vary only little in length.

Men A-final: 5-6 (Legtimes)

1.	Olav Lundanes	6:02	+0:00
2.	Anders Nordberg	6:06	+0:04
3.	Scott Fraser	6:10	+0:08
4.	Valentin Novikov	6:11	+0:09
5.	Matthias Kyburz	6:11	+0:09
6.	Gustav Bergman	6:11	+0:09
7.	Topi Anjala	6:11	+0:09
8.	Frédéric Tranchand	6:12	+0:10
9.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	6:16	+0:14
10.	Jani Lakanen	6:16	+0:14
33.	Matthias Merz	6:53	+0:51

Fastest of all is Lundanes with a combination of the red and yellow variant – ahead of Nordberg who runs the blue variant. Novikov runs the red variant. At this leg Merz does a big routechoice error – running at the northern side of the lake (purple alternative) – loosing more than 50 seconds to Lundanes (could this be a direction error and not a pure routechoice error?). This is a very decisive point in the race. This northern routechoice gives some more path running, but as you can see, the runnability on Merz’s route at the north side of the lake is poorer than at the south side of the lake – especially in the rocky area.

Men A-final: 5-6 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	24:22	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	24:43	+0:21
3.	Anders Nordberg	24:53	+0:31
4.	Oleksandr Kratov	25:21	+0:59
5.	Matthias Merz	25:34	+1:12
6.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	25:38	+1:16
7.	Martins Sirmais	25:38	+1:16
8.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	25:40	+1:18
9.	Gernot Kerschbaumer	25:46	+1:24
10.	Mikhail Mamleev	25:54	+1:32

At this point in the race Merz has lost the initiative – and is more than a minute behind Lundanes in 5th. Lundanes is holding on to his lead – 21 seconds ahead of Novikov. Nordberg has the bronze position at this point.

Men 7-8

After control 7 the course changes characteristics – from the open, rather flat and stony terrain to hilly terrain with wet marshes. The leg from control 7 to control 8 is a leg where steep hills and marshes are obstacles on the way – forcing the runners to make a choice: Either climb the hill / wade through the marsh – or run around. The runners have not run many marshes yet in this race, and have thus not complete knowledge about how much slower the marshes are. There are some small paths a the middle of the leg which can be used to potentially increase the speed and make the orienteering easier, but these paths are not very good.

There are a number of alternatives (see below) – with lengths ranging from around 900 meter for the straightest route to around 1000 meters for the longest of the drawn routes (left, light blue). Based on a statistical analysis, you can simplified say that the straighter/shorter you run, the faster you are. Novikov is fastest ahead of Lundanes – both running straight/right variants (close to the red alternative below). Merz again looses more than 20 seconds by choosing a non-optimal route – loosing most of the time on the last part of the leg (see illustration below).

Men A-final: 7-8 (Legtimes)

1.	Valentin Novikov	6:07	+0:00
2.	Olav Lundanes	6:12	+0:05
3.	Philippe Adamski	6:13	+0:06
4.	Johan Runesson	6:15	+0:08
5.	Olli-Markus Taivainen	6:18	+0:11
6.	Frédéric Tranchand	6:23	+0:16
7.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	6:25	+0:18
8.	Audun Hultgreen Weltzien	6:25	+0:18
9.	Jan Sedivy	6:28	+0:21
10.	Matthias Merz	6:31	+0:24

Men A-final: 7-8 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	32:15	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	32:26	+0:11
3.	Anders Nordberg	33:38	+1:23
4.	Matthias Merz	33:42	+1:27
5.	Martins Sirmais	34:14	+1:59
6.	Johan Runesson	34:17	+2:02
7.	Philippe Adamski	34:19	+2:04
8.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	34:26	+2:11
9.	Gernot Kerschbaumer	34:28	+2:13
10.	Oleksandr Kratov	34:34	+2:19

Novikov gets even closer to Lundanes at this point – now being only 11 seconds behind – while Merz now is 1:27 behind. Swedish Runesson had a few good legs and is up at 6th place.

Men 8-18 (including forking part)

In the forking part Lundanes takes around 20-30 seconds on Novikov and Merz. Now the gap down to Novikov is at 36 seconds – nearly two minutes down to Merz.

Men A-final: 18. (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	46:51	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	47:27	+0:36
3.	Anders Nordberg	48:41	+1:50
4.	Matthias Merz	48:43	+1:52
5.	Martins Sirmais	49:46	+2:55
6.	Oleksandr Kratov	50:05	+3:14*
7.	Johan Runesson	50:11	+3:20*
8.	Frédéric Tranchand	50:26	+3:35*
9.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	50:28	+3:37*
10.	Pavlo Ushkvarok	50:31	+3:40*

Men 18-19

The men’s leg 18-19 is the leg where Lundanes looses most time in this race – by fighting straight (red route below) instead of using one of the alternatives around with better runnability and less hills. The northern route of Merz and Lauenstein is the fastest (green below) – exploiting the path at the north edge of the control and also saving some height compared to the direct route of Lundanes. The southern choice also has significant parts of path running. The third illustration below shows this difference in speed on the path/road compared to Lundanes in the hilly terrain.

Men A-final: 18-19 (Legtimes)

1.	Marc Lauenstein	6:48	+0:00
2.	Matthias Merz	6:50	+0:02
3.	Anders Nordberg	6:53	+0:05
4.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	6:53	+0:05
5.	Philippe Adamski	6:53	+0:05
6.	Valentin Novikov	6:56	+0:08
7.	Oleksandr Kratov	6:58	+0:10
8.	Audun Hultgreen Weltzien	6:58	+0:10
9.	Gustav Bergman	6:58	+0:10
10.	Pavlo Ushkvarok	7:02	+0:14
16.	Olav Lundanes	7:16	+0:28

Here the different variants on the leg are shown.

Men A-final: 18-19 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	54:07	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	54:23	+0:16
3.	Matthias Merz	55:33	+1:26
4.	Anders Nordberg	55:34	+1:27
5.	Oleksandr Kratov	57:03	+2:56
6.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	57:21	+3:14
7.	Marc Lauenstein	57:24	+3:17
8.	Pavlo Ushkvarok	57:33	+3:26
9.	Philippe Adamski	57:40	+3:33
10.	Martins Sirmais	57:46	+3:39

Lundanes keeps his lead after this bad routechoice – but the lead is now reduced to 16 seconds. Merz eats up nearly half a minute – and takes back the third position from Nordberg.

Men 21-22

The leg from 21 to 22 does not offer so big route choice alternatives – but is still a bad leg for both Lundanes and Novikov who loose 24 and 39 seconds to Merz, respectively. The trick on this leg is to keep close to the line on the first part of the leg (as there is not much to earn with respect to runnability with moving away from the line), and exploiting the paths in the seconds part of the leg.

A slight left alternative is the fastest here. Both Lundanes and Novikov loose time by running too far to the north at the first part of the leg as you can see from the illustrations below.

Men A-final: 21-22 (Legtimes)

1.	Matthias Merz	7:46	+0:00
2.	Martins Sirmais	7:47	+0:01
3.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	7:49	+0:03
4.	Marc Lauenstein	7:51	+0:05
5.	Frédéric Tranchand	7:53	+0:07
6.	Jan Sedivy	8:02	+0:16
7.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	8:05	+0:19
8.	Anders Nordberg	8:08	+0:22
9.	Jani Lakanen	8:08	+0:22
10.	Olav Lundanes	8:10	+0:24
21.	Valentin Novikov	8:25	+0:39

Men A-final: 21-22 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	65:33	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	66:13	+0:40
3.	Matthias Merz	66:41	+1:08
4.	Anders Nordberg	67:17	+1:44
5.	Marc Lauenstein	68:43	+3:10
6.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	68:47	+3:14
7.	Oleksandr Kratov	68:51	+3:18
8.	Martins Sirmais	69:08	+3:35
9.	Pavlo Ushkvarok	69:18	+3:45
10.	Philippe Adamski	69:31	+3:58

Looking at the overall, Merz is suddenly down at 1:08 behind (down from 1:52 after the forking) – whereas Novikov is at 40 seconds behind Lundanes. Nordberg is still fighting for a medal – 1:44 behind Lundanes. Down to Lauenstein in 4th there is 3:10. Lauenstein has slowly been getting closer on the last legs – being famous for his strong finishes in long distance races.

Men 22-23

The leg from 21 to 22 was the last long leg in the race. Two shorter routechoice legs from 22-23 and 23-24 were offered before the physically hard finish of the race.

The leg from 22-23 does not give very big time differences, but it still seems clear from the split times that a northern variant is fastest – a few seconds faster than the direct variant of Novikov and Merz and the combination of northern/direct of Lundanes. THe southern variant of Bergman is far too long.

Men A-final: 22-23 (Legtimes)

1.	Anders Nordberg	3:45	+0:00
2.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	3:46	+0:01
3.	Valentin Novikov	3:50	+0:05
4.	Olav Lundanes	3:54	+0:09
5.	Matthias Merz	3:54	+0:09
6.	Marc Lauenstein	3:55	+0:10
7.	Yuryj Tambasov	3:55	+0:10
8.	Oleksandr Kratov	3:56	+0:11
9.	Gernot Kerschbaumer	3:57	+0:12
10.	Edgars Bertuks	3:57	+0:12

Men A-final: 22-23 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	69:27	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	70:03	+0:36
3.	Matthias Merz	70:35	+1:08
4.	Anders Nordberg	71:02	+1:35
5.	Marc Lauenstein	72:38	+3:11
6.	Oleksandr Kratov	72:47	+3:20
7.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	73:07	+3:40
8.	Philippe Adamski	73:32	+4:05
9.	Martins Sirmais	73:42	+4:15
10.	Pavlo Ushkvarok	73:55	+4:28

In the overall a few more seconds earned for Novikov – now down at only 36 seconds lead for Lundanes.

Men 24-25

The leg from 24 to 25 is a classical “left or right around the lake” leg – which suprisingly both Lundanes and Merz got wrong. The right side is shorter – but the left is faster due to more path running.

The 7 best times are run to the north here – with Merz and Lundanes at 8th and 9th going south. It is probably 8-9 seconds faster to go north.

Men A-final: 24-25 (Legtimes)

1.	Philippe Adamski	2:57	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	2:58	+0:01
3.	Marc Lauenstein	2:58	+0:01
4.	Martins Sirmais	2:58	+0:01
5.	Matthias Müller	3:03	+0:06
6.	Anders Holmberg	3:04	+0:07
7.	Aleksei Alekseyonok	3:04	+0:07
8.	Matthias Merz	3:05	+0:08
9.	Olav Lundanes	3:06	+0:09
10.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	3:06	+0:09

Men A-final: 24-25 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	73:57	+0:00
2.	Valentin Novikov	74:27	+0:30
3.	Matthias Merz	75:04	+1:07
4.	Anders Nordberg	75:36	+1:39
5.	Marc Lauenstein	76:59	+3:02
6.	Oleksandr Kratov	77:29	+3:32
7.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	77:49	+3:52
8.	Philippe Adamski	78:00	+4:03
9.	Martins Sirmais	78:11	+4:14
10.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	78:38	+4:41

With Novikov going north and Lundanes south, Lundanes’s lead has shrunk to only 30 seconds ahead of the physically tough finish! Merz is 1:07 down on Lundanes.

Last part

The last part is mostly physical  - the tough finish costing Novikov the silver medal which he has had in his pocket for more than an hour. Merz is strong – coming up in second spot.

Men A-final: 32-33 (Total times)

1.	Olav Lundanes	87:25	+0:00
2.	Matthias Merz	88:27	+1:02
3.	Valentin Novikov	88:53	+1:28
4.	Anders Nordberg	89:42	+2:17
5.	Marc Lauenstein	90:29	+3:04
6.	Oleksandr Kratov	92:18	+4:53
7.	Philippe Adamski	92:35	+5:10
8.	Dmitry Tsvetkov	92:37	+5:12
9.	Hans Gunnar Omdal	92:54	+5:29
10.	Frédéric Tranchand	93:19	+5:54

Lundanes versus Merz

Below you see an AutOanalysis between gold medalist Olav Lundanes and silver medalist Matthias Merz. In the AutOanalysis you can clearly see the conclusions drawn above – with Merz loosing time on the routechoices to 6 and 8, and Lundanes loosing time on the route choice to 19 and 22. Also note hhow fast Merz is in the lower part of the small last loop.

• AutOanalysis Lundanes versus Merz in 2DRerun

Lundanes versus Novikov

Here also the AutOanalysis between Lundanes and Novikov. There is no segment with more than 12 seconds difference between Novikov and Lundanes! Very close races. Lundanes wins because he is stronger in the end and does slightly fewer of the small errors than Novikov does.

• AutOanalysis Lundanes versus Novikov in 2DRerun

Women’s race

For the women’s race no full analysis is given, but illustrations are included. Simone Niggli is the fastest on most legs – winning 15 of 24 legs – loosing only 14 seconds to “Superwomen” until she got the message that she will win the race at the spectator control.

Niggli versus Riabkina

Comparing Niggli versus Riabkina gives a lot of red numbers in the autOanalysis – Niggli has simply been running faster all the way (except when Niggli and Riabkina were together for some controls). Therefore a second autOanalysis is also included (below the first one) where all times in Riabkina’s and Niggli’s routes are adjusted by the overall difference between them. Then it is possible to see more clearly in which parts of the race Niggli looses some time compared to Riabkina when adjusting for the difference in running speed. Relatively seen Niggli opens quite “slow” to the first control – as she also said in her interview. Then she has an amazing speed until control 3. Generally Niggli is very strong in the hills – both up and down.

The only bad long leg for Niggli is the leg from 9 to 10 were she relatively seen looses some 20 seconds (although she is just as fast as Riabkina).

Riabkina looses some time around the 8th and 9th control – and also to control 18 and in the uphill in the end.

• AutOanalysis Niggli versus Riabkina in 2DRerun

Women 2-3

The left side of the lake seems faster – and is also run by most runners.

Women 4-5

The same leg as the men – and the same routes are the fastest: Direct variants!

Women 7-8

Again the fastest is to keep close to the line. Niggli crushes the others on this leg.

Women 9-10

Women 12-13

Thanks to Johan Fegar for very good help with making figures ! The analysis is made using 2DRerun/3DRerun.

Many route choice options and varied orienteering – that is what met the competitors in today’s middle distance final in the European Championships in Skattugnbyn, Sweden.

This article is part of the EOC 2012 GPS-analysis series. In a cooperation with the EOC 2012organizers, World of O/O-training.net will do GPS-analysis after each of the EOC races in Sweden the coming week.

Men Start-1 / Women Start – 1

Men:

Women:

To the first control the best choise was clearly to go left which as you see on the routechoice statistics for both the men and women above. This was also the coursesetter Eva Jurenikova’s jugdement ahead of the event. One of the main reasons for so many runners choosing the rightmost route, is that the hill was very steep – and it was tempting to go right. I was out as a test runner in the morning, and even if I knew that left was supposed to be faster, I choose the rightmost option due to the tough hill.

One interesting point here: Both the European champions Lundanes and Niggli chose a non-optimal route. Lundanes went right and lost a few seconds. Niggli went direct(!) through the big depression – loosing nearly half a minute to Minna Kauppi!

Men 2-3 / Women 2-3

Men:

Women:

From 2 to 3 there were two main choices – either left saving some height or right using a path for part of the leg. The rightmost choice using the path was tempting for many as this reduces the technical difficulty of the leg somewhat. However, based on the routes run it looks like the majority of fast times are run on the left variant. You should, however, make the last half of the route as short as possible (many took a too wide curve).

Interestingly, Olav Lundanes took the “wrong” choice again – but run fast. All four top women took the left option.

Men 5-6 / Women 5-6

Men:

Women:

The leg from 5 to 6 was the leg in the course which spread the runners most. However the different routechoices were very equal in running time. The course setters favourite was the northernmost choise – which Olav Lundanes choose. However the choice of Kratov (going south all the way on the road) was nearly just as fast.

Men 8-9

The leg from 8 to 9 was the longest leg in the mens class. The terrain did not invite to long routechoice-legs with very distinct routes – the “challenge” on this leg is the very last part of the leg. The left alternative is about 70 meters shorter – but you need to take a lot of extra, steep height. In addition you get more tricky control-taking by going left.

Based on the routes run – and also the course setters advice ahead of the race – the rightmost option were you go around the green area on the northern edge is the fastest.

Women 9-10

The women’s 9-10 waas not really a routechoice leg – a straight route was the only viable option. Still – typically of a middle distance – many runners lost time on the long leg due to the change in orienteering technique necessary. This was increased by the change in terrain characteristics

Men 12-13

The men’s leg 12-13 was an interesting leg. As you can see above, the fastest times were run on straight variants (don’t trust the split times above as these are GPS split times). Lundanes took time on the others here – the other Top 4 runners spreading well on different route alternatives. The straight variants are 60 meters shorter with not much more ascent – does it is clearly too far to take e.g. Carl Waaler Kaas’s route around to the right.

Men 16-17 / Women 11-12

Men:

Women:

The leg from 16-17 for the men and the similar leg 11-12 for the women each had two distinct route choice alternatives: Either going right and using the big road and running a bit longer – or going left and taking more height while running shorter.

For both the men and the women, the left option up and down the hill has been run faster – however there is a big spread in running times for this route choice whereas runners running the rightmost routechoice have more consistently run good times.  Based on this the rightmost choise around the road might very well be the best option.

Do more yourself

The above analysis is done in 2DRerun – and all the GPS material is available there for you to do more analysis:

• 2DRerun Men’s middle
• 2DRerun women’s middle

The Middle Qualification opened the European Championships today – with all women runners carrying a GPS. Here you find a quick GPS analysis of the race. As this was a qualification race, focus is more on where the race was lost than on where it was won!

This article is part of the EOC 2012 GPS-analysis series. In a cooperation with the EOC 2012 organizers, World of O/O-training.net will do GPS-analysis after each of the EOC races in Sweden the coming week.

Jansson versus Alexandersson

The above illustration compares the routes of  two of the big profiles of this Europan Championships – Swedish Helena Jansson and Tove Alexandersson – finishing 1st and 2nd in Heat 3. As you can see (check out Jansson versus Alexandersson in 2DRerun for yourself to go further in the analysis), the main difference in this second part of the course seems to be running speed in the tougher parts of the terrain (yellow) and the last uphill.

See also:

• Kauppi versus Broadman (Heat A) – note slow loading as all routes in the heat are loaded. Note how Kauppi runs very straight along the red line all the way.
• Hausken versus Niggli (Heat B) – again includes all runners in the heat. Simone looses time by running around to number 11 – it is further around than in Heat C shown below though.
• Jansson versus Alexandersson (Heat C) – again all runners included.

Looks easy – can be tricky

The courses look seemingly easy when looking at them at the map, but still there were lots of mistakes made – mostly direction mistakes as you can see in the GPS-tracking from the women. A combination of running speed and good direction were the key ingredients to get to the finals. And of course accurate orienteering in the green areas.

One runner who had some problems in the start of the race was Norway’s Heidi Bagstevold. As you see on the illustration above, 45 degrees off already to the first control lost her more than half a minute. A bad compass direction to number 3 cost another 20 seconds – and then the big 3-minute mistake at number 6.  Happy ending for Bagstevold, though: She managed to keep the speed and secure her orienteering on the rest of the course, and made it to the A-final.

Direction

Looking at the spreading of routes on this leg from control 7 to control 8, it is obvious that straight is fastes (green color = fast). Looks like some might need to practice a bit more compass running before the A- and B-finals?

Although direct was faster in almost all legs today – there is no rule without exception. On the leg to number 11 (see below) it seems like the road option to the left is slightly faster. The reason for this is the tough terrain direct.

In a cooperation with the EOC 2012 organizers, World of O/O-training.net will do GPS-analysis after each of the EOC races in Sweden the coming week. As a warm-up I have taken a brief look at some of the trainings in EOC-relevant terrain which have been uploaded to 3DRerun/2DRerun.

As running speed and focus has been different for the different runners, this analysis will more look at some examples from different EOC training maps than to look at a specific analysis. Still it can be good to take a look to see what kind of challenges the runners will meet in Sweden next week. You can also take a look at what the course setters say about the terrain and the challenges at the EOC webpage. - Those that ran pre-EOC and Elitserien at Bonäs in spring 2011 may be expecting similar, extremely fast pine heath terrain with sandy ridges. Sure, there are similarities with Bonäsheden but the terrain in Skattungbyn is more varied, many of the ridges are higher, the depressions deeper and the amount of detail greater.

Sample 1 (a): Run straight lines

This sample is from a one-man relay training at Åmotjärn 2. Typical for this terrain is many small hills with some some open forest, some greener areas and some marshes. In many cases the fastest route is to stay as close to the line as possible – and in this example you can see how staying close to the line usually gives you an advantage of some seconds compared to making curves out.  Open sample in 2DRerun.

Sample 1 (b): Direction mistake – underestimating difficulties

Control number 20 above is one control were many runners did a direction mistakes. It is actually a quite easy control if you pay attention to direction and contours (to the left of the line) and the big path (the small path might be tricky to see?). The big path just ahead of the control makes you think the control is very easy – that is probably a reason for the many mistakes here. Open in 2DRerun.

Sample 2: Run straight lines II

The second sample is from an EOC training on the map Vika. Compass and running straight is again important in this second example, even if the terrain characteristics are quite different. The example clearly again shows how all the small detours you take away from the line costs you a few seconds here and a few seconds there.  The straight route choice is by no means the best choice for all legs in the EOC terrain – but in the cases where it is, you should use your compass and run straight. Open sample in 2DRerun here to take a closer look at it.

However: Don’t get fooled by the examples above – there may also be legs in this terrain-type where routechoices will be decisive! Both micro-routechoices and longer routechoices – so the straight line is not always the best approach – however make sure that you can run straight wherever it is necessary.

Sample 3: Speed adaption training, Gesunda

The third example is a speed adaption training in Gesunda – on a snowy day which you can read about on Gustav Bergman’s Doma-archive (Kerschbaumer was there the same day). Two of the worlds best orienteers who are among the favorites at the upcoming EOC  - a bad day for both of them – they hopefully learned a lot before returning to the Falun-area next week!  - A legendary bad performance. I don’t know what I shall say, is Bergman’s comment on his Doma-archive. The snow surely did not improve the concentration, but you should not fall asleep mentally on the long legs in this terrain. Also for the legs down the hills the tactics should be put on making the control easy to find. See example in 2DRerun here.

As a part of the Norwegian program for educating trainers within orienteering (the Trainer 2 course), Sindre Haverstad has made a nice presentation about “O-technical analysis” for trainers. It is in Norwegian, but there are many illustrations, so you will get the idea also without being fluent in Norwegian.

The presentation looks into different types of analysis a trainer – but also an athlete – can use for analysis of orienteering technical training. The content goes from traditional techniques like conversations with the athlete/split times to modern analysis like GPS-analysis with 2DRerun and HeadCam analysis with 3DRerun or Camolyze.

• HTML-version of the presentation
• Article on Haverstad’s webpage including link to the presentation in PDF-format

The presentation is highly recommended.