How do you plan an urban event?

[binman]

Just trying to be helpful and supportive guys...

[andypat]

Its certainly possible to offer different routes on most long legs whether its in forest or urban terrain, but that doesn't mean they're all good 'route choice' legs. An urban planner in a recent thread was proud that all the leaders took different routes on one leg - the reason they all took different routes was that there was no discernible good route and indeed they all took about the same time.

Another planner also suggested that on some legs the optimum route choice could save you 5 seconds, but of course the map gave no clue as to which was the faster so it was just down to luck..

I think these are interesting reflections but its also important not to get too hung up about small issues in what is after all a developing branch of the sport. Everyone at some stage is going to be a novice urban planner and there's no such thing as a perfectly planned urban race. you'll always get some varied opinion, whether about traps or dog legs or lack of route choice. As a planner you learn from experience. Best thing is to get out there and expose yourself!

A good 'route choice' leg should have at least one significantly faster and/or safer route which isn't immediately obvious but can be discerned using the map.

I think somebody mentioned doglegs being more acceptable in urban orienteering - a dogleg being in and out of the control the same way. What I'd add is that urban competitors generally dont want to be covering the same old ground (its boring) so where one possible route choice out of a control is to reverse a signficant part of the route in, its worth making sure that the penalty in time/distance/climb or whatever for this route choice is significant enough (5sec is signficant in sprint distance but maybe less so in urban) that you as planner can cleverly point out what he/she should have done during the post race moan session...

[Jayne]

I think it was me that mentioned doglegs (possibly on the other thread of the same name). To clarify I was thinking in and out a short distance to a control rather than covering any more ground than that - I also don't like long doglegs back where I've come from, 10-20 m can cope with.

[Sloop]

IMHO ... a dogleg is good (even if quite a long one) if ... it is the best route, and it isn't trivial to see that it is the best route. ie. the skill being tested is advance prep for the next leg so you lose out if you unthinkingly dib and continue.

[Oldman]

I also don't like long doglegs back where I've come from, 10-20 m can cope with.

Actually, I quite like them - even creating them if there is an apparently similar choice - because it sometimes makes the speed out of the dog leg much faster

[andypat]

IMHO ... a dogleg is good (even if quite a long one) if ... it is the best route, and it isn't trivial to see that it is the best route. ie. the skill being tested is advance prep for the next leg so you lose out if you unthinkingly dib and continue.

I can think of a few examples where I'd agree with you, mainly in particularly complex areas or where there are huge deviations, but overall I think that works better as a philosophy for sprint rather than urban. If the two routes look similar, then I'd generally choose the route I'd already covered to help me plan ahead for the next part.

[ianandmonika]

Not sure these have been mentioned
- make sure the map is ok, especially around control sites, and small alleys, openings etc are legible. Is the map up to scratch, seems to be a bit more critical than for Forest events where competitors cope with some map variability
- be careful of open/ locked gates, may not be open early on a Saturday/Sunday morning
- how do you cope with the youngsters course - no road crossings, accompanied, etc : might determine where start/finish are
- be clear on the control description
- don't be afraid of long legs, make competitors think of route choices (is running backwards a viable route choice, comes up more in urban events)
- careful if selective use of some houses yards/ gardens as compared to others that are OOB, needs to be mentioned in details

Good luck

[awk]

- don't be afraid of long legs, make competitors think of route choices (is running backwards a viable route choice, comes up more in urban events)
Good luck

After recent experiences, some of which have already been touched on on this and other threads, i'd add that the planner should equally not be afraid to use sections of multiple consecutive short legs, with plenty of changes of direction, to force changes in the mental and physical pace and rhythm. Whereas urban races have in the past appeared a bit reluctant to use longer legs, recently it's been the other way round.

[ianandmonika]

Awk- fully agree with that. Long leg into a complex area, then 4/5 technical controls in a tight area with much direction change, works well

[cbg]

I'm quite a bit slower "running backwards" than forwards.

[Jayne]

Awk - also pretty much how i plan urban

[SJC]

Long leg into a complex area, then 4/5 technical controls in a tight area with much direction change, works well.

Sounds just like good planning for a forest event. So is there any real difference between the two ?

[AndyC]

When reviewed the last event I planned I realised that I had treated a large block of impenetrable vegetation in the same way I would have treated a large building - giving competitors the choice of routes to the E and W (requiring you to initially run away from the next control rather than towards it) - actually the vegetation was not as impenetrable as I and 2 mappers thought it was one competitor went through but the amount of "claret" on his control card proved it wasn't the best route!
Anyway the point is that the skills are similar I think it is just the application that changes when you change type of terrain (after all I would plan the exit direction for a depression differently on a moor with high visibility compared with in a wood where other runners wouldn't give as strong visual cue to the location of the control)

[Gnitworp]

actually the vegetation was not as impenetrable as I and 2 mappers thought it was one competitor went through but the amount of "claret" on his control card proved it wasn't the best route!

More proof of single-minded determination than necessarily of an inferior route, surely

[Glucosamine]

AndyC wrote:"actually the vegetation was not as impenetrable as I and 2 mappers thought it was one competitor went through but the amount of "claret" on his control card proved it wasn't the best route!"

Was it mapped as impenetrable or as fight (description on legend)? Penetrable 'impenetrable' where local knowledge helps is still one of the frustrations of forest-O. One can criticise urban / ISSOM on many counts, but at least it is to be regarded as what it says on the tin (not that everybody pays attention). Perhaps the convergence of mapping styles next time around will indeed help...