London Ultrasprint + London City Race

[awk]

Also that weekend in Open House London, with lots of buildings open to the public.

That really made the weekend.

[Roger]

Also that weekend in Open House London, with lots of buildings open to the public.

That really made the weekend.

While waiting for the Tour of Britain on Lower Thames Street, we asked a cycle marshal what the long queue opposite, heading into an anonymous office block, was for. The astonishing answer was 'the Roman Baths'.

[rob f]

I couldn't get into one canada square though

[rob f]

Also think the planning today was a little weak, save for the odd good leg. The best bit on Elite was definitely the north bit around limehouse way, kept me thinking round most of it.

[rob f]

Also think the planning today was a little weak, save for the odd good leg. The best bit on Elite was definitely the north bit around limehouse way, kept me thinking round most of it.

[buzz]

General consensus seemed to be disappointing planning. Certainly the M50+ course had very little interest apart from the occasional view. No doubt there were areas that couldn't be used, but 1km legs with no route choice and few changes of direction don't really offer much of a challenge. The younger kids course looked good though.

Having said that I enjoyed the event as a whole so thanks to LOK and SLOW for a good weekend away.

Any sign of any results?

[paul]

http://cityrace.org/files/2013/results/

[graeme]

disappointing planning... M50

This was my second City race, in both cases the Open course was much better than M50. Next year I might get the message.

Certainly it could have been more twisty-turny and tricky, but I suspect there are some structural issues too.

It's not about the orienteering. The course provided a great opportunity to run in spectacular surroundings. Did I come to run flat out through Canary Wharf with time to look at the view, or wriggle round some skanky estate? If you have an event at Livingston, there's no need to compromise the courses for sightseeing opportunity. London strikes a balance. Also, once the decision was made on the start, there wasn't much scope for a 35-minute-for-old-people course but to head straight back to the finish. But again, train to the start - what a great feature to the day!

General consensus

I wouldn't go as far as to say that if "general consensus" on nope didn't like it, it must be good. But. This "consensus" that it should have been harder was confined to the more diehard orienteers. Simple fact is that the race is growing fast, so the real consensus must be they're doing something right!

Of course, if you want both scenic *and* technical courses, you need a special type of area. Like an ancient town built around a castle...

[Gross]

Of course, if you want both scenic *and* technical courses, you need a special type of area. Like an ancient town built around a castle...

That would be Havana then?

[HarryO]

My first London City Race and I had a great day out. Thank you SLOW. I enjoyed the train ride to the start. Great scenery. I saw one guy orienteering with camera in hand, wish I had done too. Turned a corner and there was the Thames and the O2 in the distance.
Only disapointment was the event center being a little cramped - and surprisingly few toilets for the size of school.

[awk]

I wouldn't go as far as to say that if "general consensus" on nope didn't like it, it must be good. But. This "consensus" that it should have been harder was confined to the more diehard orienteers. Simple fact is that the race is growing fast, so the real consensus must be they're doing something right!

The reason the London race has grown is that it has established a good reputation, not just for the scenery, but also for the technical interest. At least on the Supervets courses, the latter was in short supply, and if this had been one of the earlier races, I suspect the London race wouldn't have grown to the size it now has.

London strikes a balance.

I certainly think it tries to. I don't think that was achieved as successfully this year as it has been in the past. I'm sorry to say that I for one was profoundly disappointed with the Men's Supervet course, and heard similar from many on this and one or two other courses. Consensus? Enough to suggest to me that it was. Only the diehard orienteers? Perhaps, but without them (us!), the race wouldn't have built up the prestige, numbers, or indeed expectations it now has.

Of course, if you want both scenic *and* technical courses, you need a special type of area. Like an ancient town built around a castle...

It's quite possible to have non-technical courses even then if the planning doesn't work (which can be for any number of reasons, including access issues etc). There was enough interest on this map to suggest that more technical courses should be viable, although that is with the caveat that we don't know enough of the context.

I don't think London is alone: races have been much more varied this year in terms of interest and challenge, with a growing incidence of courses where some of the subtleties of urban planning appear to have been put aside at times to focus more on legs where maintenance of running speed is the primary challenge. This may be a deliberate policy by planners, or maybe due to circumstances, but I've certainly found it a trend that I hope can be reversed.

As for London - well with it being Open House weekend, the Tour of Britain, and the race itself, we had an excellent weekend, but, I can't in all honesty say the orienteering was the centrepiece of the weekend that we have come to expect, and without the other attractions, I'm not sure that more of the same would see us continuing for much longer to make it the regular feature of the calendar that it has been ever since its inauguration.

[buzz]

General consensus

This "consensus" that it should have been harder was confined to the more diehard orienteers.

Actually almost everybody I spoke to or overheard after the race used the same term in reference to the planning 'disappointing' - one or two used stronger terms! They must have been hoping for something different.

Personally I thought it was a great event for all the reasons you gave - but the planning could have been more challenging.

As you say there were most probably structural issues - possibly last minute, but it felt a little dumbed down even within the areas used.

[Angry Haggis]

Little surprised to hear that people were unhappy with the M50+ course - this was actually one of my favourite courses (Women's Elite and Men's Open were the best two of all, I think.)

Looking at the top 6 M50+ people that have posted their routes on Routegadget - http://www.slow.routegadget.co.uk/cgi-b ... 111&kieli= - for 15 of the 22 legs, there were at least two different routes taken by these top 6 people. In some cases, all 6 went different ways. Sometimes, 5 of the 6 took the longer route. In one case, none of the 6 took the shortest route! Most of the remaining 7 legs were short ones use to "set up" another big route-choice one. This course also had a good mix of long and short legs.

On the basis that, except for very hilly areas or very technical areas, the basic "challenge" from urban orienteering comes from route choice, and Routegadget clearly shows plenty of different route choices being made, I'm unsure exactly what more could have been done!

N.B. The map shows lots of interesting looking private housing estates (mainly in the south-west and east of the map) that weren't used, as we didn't have permission for these. I opted not to olive-screen or purple-screen these because it would distract from the overall look of the map.

[andypat]

I was disappointed not to make it down. Looking at the map and courses, its difficult to see what the complaints are about. The map looks fantastic, even on the RG low res screen. Controls 3 and 5 on the M 50 look like classic urban controls, tempting you into a bad route choice. No 11 maybe looks a bit weak for a long leg, but maybe we're all expecting the Barbican every year?

[NeilC]

I found that attempting to do one leg on the Men's Super Vets by map memory significantly increased it's difficulty. It taken me almost 24 hours to force myself to look at the results but have decided to draw my route for others' amusement.

On course specifics I had spotted the trap into 3 when looking at the maps in the start lane, so was prepared for that. I thought that I had spotted a gate on the way to 5 - there wasn't one! 8-9 just needs forgetting. Missed the steps close to 11 so went too far round. Plenty of time on the longer legs to spot route into park.

Overall I enjoyed the variety of terrain, including the beach leg. As Ollie pointed out there was route choice and I probably lost a couple of 5 or so second blocks by going the wrong way round. The event was well run and fully deserved its now iconic status. I'm now trying to remember if I've ever (virtually) overtaken almost 60 runners in the 2nd half of a race before.