The results of the European Orienteering Championships 2021
A and B won Gold with the home team (A’s sister was the course setter)
Knock out Sprint
B won Gold, A won Silver (B’s brother was the course setter)
A was 6th, B was 11th (no siblings were involved as course setters)
Just the facts. What a coincidence…
14 thoughts on “Thanks God, it was not in China”
To be fair A is a five time winner of the World Cup Overall. While B was second the last regular season (2019).
(The real scandal are the “lousy” results of Rauturier and Steiwer.😁)
Sorry to correct it, but B was the five time winner of the World Cup Overall, and A was 5th in 2019 🙂
Of course, past results are the best assurance that everything was fine despite the unfortunate appearance, as proven by Lance Armstrong, Ben Johnson, and many more elite athletes 😇
We just have to accept that in a small orienteering nation there are so few who understand international standards, that involvement of brothers and sisters as course setters is simply unavoidable.
Indeed I mixed up A & B, but A was 2nd in the overall World Cup in 2019. Overall WC you hardly can succeed in with the shear help of a sibling.
Yes, you are right, A was 2nd in 2019. He was 5th before China.
Of course, one has to be very good to take advantage of any “extra help”. But being good, even very good, is far from being a guarantee that one does not advantage he should not have received. Lance Armstrong, Ben Johnson, and many other athletes were very good, but felt that they needed the extra help.
So, why could not the EOC 2021 organisers look for course setters who were less conflicted?
Some of the highly conflicted course setters were rather inexperienced. So, why?
To keep it short: They are the most experienced organizers in the orienteering world, with almost annual World Cups since 2007, lately even taking over the IOF World Cup and aiming for WOC 2023. The have the self-confidence to appoint the course setters which they think suit best. In the EOC case three former WOC medalists at one hand, people they trust on the other hand .
 https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6803007705414946816/?commentUrn=urn%3Ali%3Acomment%3A(activity%3A6802718470740959232%2C6803007656836505600) (Nils Eyer assists BGH at the WOC2023)
Yes, past success puts one above temptation and suspicion.
Or at least, we must believe so.
The European Elite runners though their lack of trust to the Chinese would spare them from presenting evidence against them. You actually are following the same logic here. But even if information doping is almost impossible to proof, you would have to present far stronger evidence than the one you presented so far. At least from my side I don’t have any intention to defend a church of trust, but of a fairness that does base on evidence.
What evidence is missing to show that two runners performed better when their siblings were the course setters?
The official results are in the IOF system, the course setters were named in the Bulletin, and the family ties are common knowledge.
causation vs correlation?
causation vs correlation?
Who knows? Maybe you?
What could be the reason that serious businesses and serious sports take conflict of interest seriously?
Maybe to avoid these type of questions?
You are comparing the results of a Sprint Relay, a Knock-out and an Individual Sprint.
You try to link a Sprint Relay result (where A, B, C and D each won his/her leg) to the relation of A and his sister? You link a choice to avoid stairs down to the last control to the relation of B and his brother? And what is the hypothesis that only siblings can cheat anyway?
I am in favor of a critical approach, but this approach must contain to be self-critical as hell. To prove your suggested pattern you had to bring indications of over-performing instead of these ineligible correlations .
I have not seen any-such yet.
-> Sprint Relay: The same CABD won the Sprint Relay in China 2019
-> A and B decided the KNS on the way to the last control. It will be really hard to prove these guys ran faster than usual, just for we talk about the two fastest guys in the Swiss Team. To decide a competition on the way to the last control, it what they were born for. https://trackmaxx.ch/results/?race=solv21&c=5acc3ed4-0cf4-4af4-83db-a022e8d218f1
I just stated the facts. Some athletes won medals on the days when their siblings were the course setters, and did not get any medals on the day when their siblings were not involved.
I did not say that anybody cheated. I did not compare different competition formats.
Apparently, the above factual points give a picture to you that you do not like.
I cannot argue with that.
I know several other Swiss who did not like that picture either, already when the course setters were announced, months before the actual competition. That may give you some comfort. You are not alone.
You may want to talk to the organisers of the EOC 2021 who selected the course setters knowing that the above constellation of factual points was possible. You may advise them, that you saw a picture that you did not like. That may encourage them next time to rethink their choice of course setters in order to avoid similar situations.
You stated an arbitrary set of facts to suggest a point… again, what is the point to say “they win if siblings are involved” about people capable to win without siblings involved? And what about all thinkable alternative hypothesis? What about question, why did neither A nor B win the Sprint? – Bergmann and Svensk did not run the KNS Knockout Finals, Michiels (3 races) dropped out in the Quarter-Final. Thus only A&B, Kasper and Simona ran the entire program of 6 races. Being able to match both Swedes the first day, they did not screen the same speed anymor the last day in their for both 6th race against Svensk in his second race and Bergmann in his 3rd … btw. the same for Fosser (6 races) who was clearly faster than Svensk in the relaybearlier in the EOC.
Thus bring on arguments, why just your facts are crucial.
What makes you believe that these facts are arbitrary?
They are from the same event. They are true. They are consistent.
Every reader can make up their mind whether they have a good impression looking at the facts, or whether they get a bad impression. Apparently, you got a bad feeling looking at these facts.
What does make you feel bad?