BOC & BRC 2010.

[EddieH]

I hate to add my bit, but the mapping of the quarry as far as I can see was not updated despite massive changes since the JK. I generally navigate on vegetation very secondarily, however as I found the contour detail not immediately obvious I transfered to the very clearly mapped vegetation. This did not take me where I wanted to go and I failed miserably to relocate as I could not envisage being where I ended up. The thing that galls me a bit is that had I used a compass I'd have had no problem - it seemed however that I didn't need one until of course I knew I was lost by which time it was too late.

No I am not the greatest navigator, but I do believe that had I used the stock compass and run technique I would not have lost all that time. I left the weekend feeling rather unfulfilled and were it not for some wnderful HOC hospitality I'd have wondered why I had gone.

Having said that I thought the individual planning was excellent - they just needed to send in a whole raft of map corrections.

Further to IanD's comments regarding the relay changeover, in the distant past the loud speakers would not have been aimed at the changeover pen, however there would have been a smaller quieter one there with a person at the final control reading out the numbers as people came into the field. Mind you with 2 last controls thi might not have worked in which case the run-in needed to come down the field, and double back up it before returning so that people had a chance of getting ready AND in position in time.

[DeerTick]

[quote="IanD"]

Control 213 on day one was not a knoll, despite being mapped and described as such. It was a hide. Fortunately, I checked the code when I eventually found it (having first missed it for reasons of my own incompetence) so I punched it and carried on. I know of some however who didn't check the code - why should they since they were looking for a knoll and this was a hide - and lost lots of time.

/quote]

I hit it within 15 m, but assumed it wasn't mine and I'd made one of my usual blunders and carried on. Cost me 4/5 minutes

I concur with what mostly everyone has said - a great weekend. Organisation top notch; terrain great; planning super.

Tick

[Gross]

I
However, it does nobody any favours to pretend that there were no problems; if we don't acknowledge mistakes, we can't learn from them.

Control 213 on day one was not a knoll, despite being mapped and described as such. It was a hide. Fortunately, I checked the code when I eventually found it ...... ..... I know of some however who didn't check the code - why should they since they were looking for a knoll and this was a hide -

Ian.... 'bollocks'

I have seen similar features many times throughout the world... if we have to take every scrap of wood off every feature then orienteering will become very boring indeed.. and those who lost time because they didn't check the code.... tough cookies... maybe they should learn how to orienteer properly because they can't and if they could then they'd have lost no time at all............

[Gross]

likewise control 213 which was quite simply a disgrace.

It wasn't and the major events comittee needs to look at it to see why so many decent orienteers were out for so long and act accordingly

Again... 'bollocks' and if you go down the road of BOF major events committee (or any other) deciding what the planning should be then the sport will become so standardised it will be a joke.... for info BOF tried to 're-plan' the elite courses but got no response

[ifititches]

Gross, I didn't raise the issue of 213 at the time, precisely because I knew that (part of) the response I might get would be like the one you have produced on this forum, and I knew what happened to me there was partially my fault for NOT SEEING IT AS A KNOLL and checking the code the first time I found it .

I also did not want to take up planner's and controller's precious time on their big day, when the rest of it had given me huge enjoyment.)

But I am shocked and disappointed that you have posted such dismissive comments, which have been fairly raised now by more than one person about one control on a course that was otherwise well-planned and controlled.

If that was a knoll I have never seen one smaller, except in the forest in LIncolnshire which was used for the Harvester a few years back. Going into a dim area of forest with a pictorial description that just says knoll, west side (no measurements) I did not see something less that half a metre high with a wigwam of sticks on it as knoll when there was a hide marked nearby. Perhaps I would have twigged sooner (no pun intended) if the only other useful feature in that area, a tiny depression with a control on it, was not completely obscured by the circle and outgoing purple line from the knoll control, so that it appeared from the map in the dim light that there was no depression in that area.

I'm sure that there are lots of people who feel just as I did about that control, and I think there's a lot more to be learned from constructive criticism of it, than there is from pretending that it wasn't a dodgy control site for the premier event of British Orienteering.

That off my chest, thanks to all concerned for an otherwise very enjoyable weekend. See you at the Harvesters

(edited first line to read "didn't" rather than "did" , though I swear I put it in as "didn't" first time around!)

[easternmost?]

Having established this thread last week here are the thoughts of the relay planner.

Individual Day.

I enjoyed a non competitive run on Course 10 (M40S). I had seen the course in advance and knew what to expect. The quarry caught me out a couple of times (I hadn’t been into it since the embargo started but I knew that there was far too much on the ground to allow every knoll to be mapped). I was unusually decisive about my route choice on the long leg and my time seems to suggest that deviating far from the straight line to avoid climb was worthwhile. I also re-familiarised myself with a few of my blue tapes for the relay race on the way round, I think I passed 6 of them.

Relays.

Quite early in the planning stage I dismissed the idea of going into the quarry because it would not be possible to plan anything less than about 5km that circled the large OOB area. Going in and out at the same crossing point didn’t seem an option either. So I decided to restrict it to Wolseley Park. Generally most of the comments about my courses have been positive. I think relays should be a head to head race so I wanted competitors on different forks to remain quite close together and often in sight of each other. I watched the Men’s Premier first leg come through controls 2,3 & 4 and it looked as though this had worked. On the long run to 57 they were still close together even though some different route choice options were taken. I was happy with all the control sites and the mapper accepted many of my suggestions and I was satisfied with the final product.
As someone spotted teams 4011 & 4012 on M40 ran with the wrong first part maps. I think this mix up happened at the folding and labelling stage. It’s very hard to find this after folding because we try to make the identity of the map secret from that point onwards. This resulted in the 3rd place team running about 50m further than a properly balanced team. Looking at the times I don’t think this affected the placings.
Overall I was happy with the outcome, the relays are very complex so it is a relief that a major mistake did not occur.

Urban race.

I enjoyed this too and by the finish I had walked / run 36km during the weekend.

Allan Williams (Relay Planner)

[Gross]

But I am shocked and disappointed that you have posted such dismissive comments, which have been fairly raised now by more than one person about one control on a course that was otherwise well-planned and controlled.

a tiny depression with a control on it, was not completely obscured by the circle and outgoing purple line from the knoll control, so that it appeared from the map in the dim light that there was no depression in that area.

Agree that the circle could / should have been broken... I missed that.

About the knoll, I visited that site at least 5 times and never once thought it wasn't a knoll..........

PS - no-one has made any comments about the other knoll control

[SJC]

About the knoll, I visited that site at least 5 times and never once thought it wasn't a knoll..........

But did you visit it after it had been disguised as a hide ?

[Mrs H]

I didn't have the knoll but all my children did - I asked the girls if it was a problem and they both said words to the effect "well it was in the right place with the right number on so no!". Young Neville had the fastest course split on that leg so I'm guessing he didn't have a prob either. I don't think any of them are guilty of over analysing while they are on the run

Interestingly Mr H had the aforementioned obscured depression ( the circle was broken to show the "knoll") he arrived at the knoll at the same time as a Miss H and said "oh I'm in the wrong place I want the knoll not the hide" and she said: "this is the knoll!" I think the phrase "thank heaven's for small mercies" came to his mind

Gross I did have a knoll 224 found myself too far to the east - but I fully expect that was my fault - I was in a different re-entrant to the one I thought coming up the hill and relocated off the pit on the edge of the circle when I decided I'd gone far enough - which I exactly had.

[ifititches]

I think this illustrates the problems of planning when people have so many styles of orienteering and variations in eyesight .From posters so far, if we count Mrs H's family as "3 knolls and 1 hide", it's about 50:50 as to what people saw (a bit like those puzzle drawings where different viewers see different things)

I spotted the "knoll"/"hide" almost immediately on my attack route, but try not to check things out that aren't my controls, and the "hide" elements made me think it wasn't, so I assumed I was too far west. A friend, who hadn't looked at the control description at all, and wasn't aware it was described as a knoll, went straight for the control code, so no probs. So if I had good enough eye sight to see codes from 5-6m away in dark forest, I maybe wouldn't be posting this now

In the context of size of the other knolls on the map though, it probably would have warranted a size on the descriptions (for those of us who do look at them) and the obscuring of the depression on the map made rapid relocation a tad more difficult, so it's a shame the lines weren't broken.

It probably would only have been a few minutes I lost, except my confusion over the apparent (to me) lack of a "knoll" in relation to the "hide" and the "absence" of a mapped depression led me into one of my favourite other mistakes, which was to start to look at the wrong control code too (and I know I'm not alone in that one either!) Now I wish I had never tried to explain...I was never going to be a top placed runner anyway.

[Gross]

.From posters so far, if we count Mrs H's family as "3 knolls and 1 hide", it's about 50:50 as to what people saw (a bit like those puzzle drawings where different viewers see different things)

Do my visits count as 5 x knoll?

[Anne]

About the knoll, I visited that site at least 5 times and never once thought it wasn't a knoll..........

How very bizarre. I think if you were out on a walk in the wood with any orienteer, without a map, and you asked them how they’d have mapped that particular feature, very few (if any) would have called it a knoll. It would be understandable, perhaps, to mark it as a knoll if there were no such concept as “hide”, but there is, so why not mark it as a hide?

As it happened, I personally had no problem finding this control (although if I hadn’t seen the flag, I certainly wouldn’t have investigated the feature, because I was looking for a knoll, not a hide). I heard the man who punched at the same time as me say “funny sort of knoll…”. Surely competitors’ opinions are of some value when it comes to issues like this? Maybe you disagree.

While I don't think this specific knoll/hide incident was a major problem, I do take issue with the way in which you've responded to people's comments. I - and, no doubt, the others who have commented - appreciate the hard work of volunteers, and I understand that it is impossible to get everything right all the time. It is, however, possible to admit that people who disagree with you might perhaps have valid points, and not to resort to dismissive rudeness.

[AndyC]

has anybody/could anybody take a picture so we know what the debate is about?

[Mrs H]

I if we count Mrs H's family as "3 knolls and 1 hide",

That wasn't what I said at all I said they reasoned that despite what it appeared to be it was in the right place with the right number on and so it must be their control.

I think if it had been me and I navigated to it I would certainly have checked the number before deciding it wasn't mine because - 1 knolls, boulders and other point features are a bit of a jumble in my mind 2 I would not have total confidence that I was right, and 3 I am naturally optimistic

[Gross]

How very bizarre. I think if you were out on a walk in the wood with any orienteer, without a map, and you asked them how they’d have mapped that particular feature, very few (if any) would have called it a knoll.

I guess the planner and the mapper thought it was a knoll also?