A bit of Navigation
Surrey Hash House Harriers | home
That Week's Directions were ! | Report 1460 | Report 1459 | Report 1458 | Report 1457 | Report 1456 | Report 1455 | Report 1454 | Report 1453 | Report 1452 | Report 1451 | Report 1450 | Report 1449 | Report 1448 | Report 1447 | Report 1446 | Report 1445 | Report 1444 | Report 1443 | Report 1442 and Link to earlier Reports
Report 1451
 |
A MARKED ABSENCE OF RELUCTANCE
|
It is often asserted, without proof, that there are no rules on the hash. Let us pay lip service to this dictum, ignore its evident falsehood, and assert in return that there are nevertheless hash axioms.... One of these is that the front runners adjust their tactics to their knowledge of the hare(s).
So what possessed Popeye to try the most difficult and the least plausible of the paths at the first check? The consequence was that the RA never again saw any hashers, other than late-comers who had got lost. (And should have known this car park by now, for heaven?s sake: Ancient Mariner, our Uncle Gerry...)
Who were the hares? They were mature reasonable and experienced females. The great Ernest Bramah (does anyone nowadays read the Kai Lung novels?) has left us as a guiding principle: Women never lead men astray, though they have been known to follow with a marked absence of reluctance.
And indeed the hares did not lead anyone astray other than Popeye - and goodness knows he needs no help in going astray. So everyone was happy, especially those who enjoy a straightforward simple trail abundant in flour, unlike last week?s masterpiece which was none of these things.
There was one common feature though: an attempt, in this case half-hearted, to erase the blobs, and in particular the check circles. Who is doing this? A dissident or disgruntled hasher? An anti-blood sports enthusiast? Are there practical jokers all over Surrey? It is not credible that one person is responsible for all the mischief we are suffering. Have we now such a reputation that all men?s hands are against us?
|
It is rumoured that long ago a trail laid by Gerry Gurney was obliterated and relaid in its entirety by one Les Oldham. (This must be an exaggeration - laying a trail is in itself an arduous and time consuming activity, and it takes some effort to erase even one blob). So we propose an Oldham Scale for such interventions.
Today, a mere 1.5, last week 4.3. Hares should note that the only remedy for such sabotage is to go round with the pack....
Once in a fog I laid flour across private property. The farmer did more than just rub out my trail, he laid an alternative in a completely different direction; by a strange chance his flour ended at a false-trail bar later in the real trail, so that the harm was minimal. (Oldham 6) OldamOtheIn general our only hope is the stamina, persistence and intelligence of the pack. (Hmmmm...) Indeed, last week Atalanta, at the cost of finishing an hour late, did resolve alone (or with one unidentified female companion? Come forward this heroine!) the trail erased all across Smithwood Common.
So many thanks to today?s hares, who appeared to include a small boy and the dog Cinders. The circle was a bit special; the GM, late as ever, had done virtually none of the trail, the RA only to the first view point check. But who allows a pedantic quest for verisimilitude to spoil a speech? The hares as a result were not even punished for their choice of colour of flour - yes, you guessed, white, in snow..... And that view was good: golden, glimmering, gorgeous. Thereafter we hashed happily through well-known and indeed attractive woods, the sun shone fitfully but pleasantly, we were not even cold till the wind sprang up around the car park. Sunday morning as it should be.
ON ON FRB
|
FRB Please Note : Cinders is NOT the dog!
This is how wars start!
... couldn't find where to put this on the web site,
can you publish, please? Thanks. Vidal. (ed.. Try contact details ... comments@sh3onsec.org) Here it is....
What is with the Surrey Hash? The Hares go to the trouble of following a masterfully executed run with a perfectly good pub which is not only warm and welcoming but also serves incredibly good food, and the pack (led by Popeye I think but certainly including our illustrious GM) decide to piss off to some back-street dive in Dorking!
And why? Because there were PEOPLE in the Hurtwood Inn and the poor hashers would have had to wait a few minutes to get a pint in their hands.
And who were these PEOPLE? Some WALKED there, some CYCLED! Both perfectly legitimate Sunday pursuits given we were in the midst of some of the finest open countryside in Surrey.
As it was, the depleted pack were perfectly comfortable, the walkers and bikers eventually moved on leaving us plenty of space. Being conscientious harriers, Greenpeace and myself had warned the pub of our arrival but accepted that it was difficult for a village inn dependent on weekend trade to cover all eventualities. They had taken a big lunch order from the walkers prior to our arrival so obviously resources were moved to the kitchen! Could no-one appreciate this?
I wasn't happy last week when members of the pack dictated that we should retire to the Bricklayers to stand outside the toilets in a smoky bar trying not to get in between the locals and their footie on the telly. Apparently "you couldn't get more than half a dozen standing" in the Hare's pub of choice - so this was better?
Is this the way things bode for the future of the Surrey Hash? If you are not keen on the run location, why not lead the sheep to one of your choice, decide on a run route and include some headless chicken impersonations to simulate checks. Isn't the Hash more than a Sunday morning run? Isn't socialising an important element in the make-up of the Surrey Hash? Shouldn't the Hares' choice of pub be as much respected as the run route? Does anyone have an opinion?
Vidal
|