Dear Organisers,

I am a concerned participant of this year’s Fun on Foot Heritage Marathon. I am writing in to air my views on a few major issues that my team and I had with the judging, organization and overall experience of the race. It is without prejudice that I state that I am thoroughly disappointed with the Marathon, especially having seen its mistakes being repeated year after year.

Firstly, the judging criteria are ambiguous. By saying that participants are judged firstly based on the locations visited, then the number of correct answers and finally the time taken, it is unclear to many on the exact weightage of points allocated to each category. This poses a dilemma in the form of whether to tackle as many stations as possible, sourcing many answers or to get a few stations done in the quickest possible time. It is truly saddening when a team from my school that completed 20 out of the 24 sites with at least most of the answers predictably correct denied a prize in any form. Many teams this year were unable to even complete a third of the sites. With the 5^th placed team winning with 36 points, our team should have been in good stead to clinch a prize. The fact that they finished 80% of their route and was still unable to even get 5^th position is bewildering. This is an issue I take great umbrage against, as this year is not the first year that teams from my school have been the victim of what we find as non-transparent and biased judging.

I come from a prestigious junior college in the East and for 4 years, our school has been sending numerous teams yearly to compete in this Marathon. There were equally numerous instances whereby the teams that came in first with more blanks filled up not winning a prize, while other teams from our school who came in much later and with lesser blanks filled up won. We actually cross referenced our answers and we knew that the winning team had lesser answers in comparison to the teams that came in earlier, even though what answers they had had been identical to theirs. This disappointing, confusing and often traumatizing turn of results has caused much grief to many students among us. Many students who have been “robbed” of their rightful prizes have been so traumatized that they refused to participate for a second time, citing their first bad experience as simply being too much to take. I also believe that this is not a reflection of poor determination and sportsmanship, but rather a response to the inability to gain answers as to why they did not win.

If the Organisers would like the quality of the teams to improve, they should first and foremost be open and transparent about the judging criteria. Rules are rules for a reason and once broken, the appropriate penalty has to be enforced. I wonder how the organizers are able to accept entries after 2.30pm when the rules state clearly that submissions after that time would be disqualified. Similarly, I question if the judges are able to count and verify the answers and chops within the 45 minutes between the deadline for submission and the announcement of results. Also, teams should be able to enquire about their personal results and the points allocated per question/location should be listed clearly after the event. This gives teams a chance to count their own points and dispute any questionable winners and also a chance to reflect andlearn. By stating that “no correspondence will be entertained”, I feel the Organisers are simply sweeping the matter under the carpet. It does not help to deny or hide the judging, since it is a integral part of the Marathon and especially if it is indeed fair.

Next, it seems that people who play by the rules do not get rewarded. There are teams that openly admit getting into taxis between stations, or worse, having parents chauffer them around to the various locations. Is there a way to prevent such blatant cheating? I doubt so. Most people get away with it without anybody knowing, and even if the station masters do catch them in the act, there is little they can do about it. Additionally, the Organisers state that traffic rules should be followed. Yet, a team that detours to take the overhead bridge is cut short by another team choosing to jaywalk across the same stretch of road. How are the Organisers going to make people play by the rules?

I wonder what values the organizers are trying to teach our kids when they take part in this Marathon if cheating goes unpunished and in some cases, rewarded, while clean, hard work counts for nothing. This is further excacerbated by the dubious judging mentioned above. The educational and fun elements that the Organisers market as a selling point for this Marathon seems to be missing. By cheating, not only do these teams learn little from this Marathon, it also presents the wrong idea that as long as they can get away with it, winning through underhand methods is acceptable.

Additionally, the often clueless and powerless station masters are a source of confusion as they themselves are unsure of where we can find the clues to the answers, or even what the site number of their station is. Such staff are understandably volunteers in most cases, but they should be properly briefed and updated. Also, they could be more empowered to deal with cheaters and teams who flout rules.

A major source of dissatisfaction I feel is from the poor demarcation of the booths themselves. The Mount Vernon station was located directly behind the Gurkha Contingent station, whereas the map indicated otherwise, putting it a distance away from the Gurkha station. As a result, many teams went on a wild goose chase in the Columbarium trying to follow the map. I understand that it is not drawn to scale, but positioning it spatially accurately would be helpful.

The booths themselves are located at simply hard to find locations at the sites themselves. It is understandable if the Organisers want to make the Marathon more challenging, but by having no indication that the team is at the correct place, many choose to skip the seemingly wrong place and move on. By having staff confirm that this is the right place, or simply putting a flag in front of the place would solve many problems. This would allow teams to find the booths and not simply just walk away after running around in the vicinity fruitlessly. This was the case of the Verdun House booth where we were very sure we were at the correct place and yet we were unable to find the booth, which was located in a tiny lane a few streets away. This proved a costly and frustrating detour as we decided to skip the station entirely. If the Organisers’ aim is to let teams learn more about Singapore’s heritage, they should make efforts to allow teams to identify that they have at least located the right place, so that they can find the information boards and learn something.

Finally, the bad experience left by the combination of the above factors have once again left me and my schoolmates traumatized and disillusioned. By sticking to the rules and trying out best to score based on how the Organisers claim to judge the Marathon, we find ourselves in an inexplicable predicament of being empty handed. While it is true that winning is not everything and the process counts and that we all joined to learn something, having many unexplained answers and a bad taste in our mouths is truly saddening. The seeming inability of a standard and transparent criteria has led many of us to come up with truly remarkable conspiracy theories such as favoritism towards particular schools or that their entries were not counted, all of  which carry a tone of resentment towards the way the Marathon is run

You have my assurances that we will not be taking part in next year’s marathon unless something is done and we will strongly advise our schoolmates to do the same. It is disappointing that such poor organization and judging lie beneath the veneer of solid advertising and publication, on the pretext of being an educational marathon. The values that can be gleaned from this Marathon are negative and wrong ones and sticking to the rules and trying to do our best seems futile in the light of the dubious winners and cheaters.

We are left with huge bouts of disappointment, sore feet and questions waiting to be answered. 

Yours sincerely,

An appalled and saddened participant