Control Descriptions

[awk]

I think that in the start lane is too late

That's the standard for most Scandinavian events that I've been to. It's not too late at all: everybody there seems to manage fine!

I disagree that it's unfair to allow competitors to see CDs in advance.

Unfairness aside, what would be good to have is a consistent, dare I say standard, way things are done. I would agree with you that at local events it really is somewhat OTT to worry about CDs etc., but at events that matter (e.g. Championships), then issuing in start lanes as standard makes sense to me.

[drobin]

I noticed on Sunday at Bradenham, that the loose versions had a different start description to the map version - neither of which in my opinion was correct!

[Karen B]

My comment overlaps this topic and the one on map scales and eyesight.
For competitors with poor eyesight, it can be a nuisance to have to turn over or unfold the map and to focus on control descriptions, then turn back and try to orientate the map, focus and find your place. Its a real time waster. Seperate descriptions do make a difference. Only need to be available at minus 2 or 3 so they can be put into a carrier. If competitors don't want them they don't have to pick them up.

[RS]

I like the way you get your control descriptions at some Scandinavian events - after initial call-up you get to tape them to your arm

[Scott]

Sometimes, it seems, having the control descriptions in advance can provide vital imformation about the equipment required to complete a course - as at the British Nights, where control 112 apparently will be "beneath the westernmost spur". I'll get me shovel...

[distracted]

will be "beneath the westernmost spur". I'll get me shovel...

Surely, if the control is there, someone's already dug the hole

[MarkM]

will be "beneath the westernmost spur". I'll get me shovel...

Surely, if the control is there, someone's already dug the hole

then it would be a pit

[DM]

will be "beneath the westernmost spur". I'll get me shovel...

Surely, if the control is there, someone's already dug the hole

then it would be a pit

Or a cave

[PG]

please make them readable. In some cases recently when they haven't been made available until the day of the event they have been printed off in a far to small font so much so that they can't be read at a walking pace let alone running.

BO rules appendix A on Control Descriptions refers to the IOF document, which says: "When printed, the description sheet boxes should be square, with a side dimension of between 5mm and 7mm."

Pre-printed descriptions for many events doen't follow this. But note that if you have 30 controls, then 30 times 5mm = 15cm, which means that the whole description will not fit in some holders. For that reason when describing the control descriptions available in the start lanes at Tankersley last month I wrote: "The maximum length is 18 cm (course 1) but can be folded to 15 cm". I used box size of 7mm for the shorter courses used by older veterans.

[NeilC]

Pretty poor effort PG - for BOC2006 I gave the size (in mm) for all 29 sets of control descriptions
http://www.lifesci.susx.ac.uk/home/Neil_Crickmore/BOC2006/fd.pdf

[NeilC]

Sometimes, it seems, having the control descriptions in advance can provide vital imformation about the equipment required to complete a course - as at the British Nights, where control 112 apparently will be "beneath the westernmost spur". I'll get me shovel...

Another cunning ploy at the BNC to prevent competitors working out their course in advance was to use the terrace description for a platform. At least on my course (5) competitors could be seen dashing straight into the woods from the pre-start so it was quite easy to identify the location of the first control from the maps displayed in the pre-start since there was only one ditch in that direction. There was also a reasonable looking terrace mapped in a sensible location for control 2 so I planned a route to that - the best laid plans......

[SJC]

An interesting note from yesterday's National Event.

An unfortunate series of misunderstandings and errors of omission resulted in those in W75 running on two different courses, 8 and 9.

This appears to have been caused by the final details indicating that the W75 class was on course 9, whereas the control descriptions had them on course 8.
Loose control descriptions were only available at the start.

Now, one might argue that this mistake shouldn't have happened, but it did. However had the control descriptions been available on the web beforehand then the discrepancy would almost certainly have been spotted in time to have sorted it out.

[gowrie]

I was at the start with a W75 who had the dilemma of which course to run as she was aware of the conflicting information. Start officials seemed unaware of the conflict prior to this - so even though I had a very late start - this had not come to the attention of officials earlier.

I would agree that if control descriptions had been available in advance this error would have come to light and the problem resolved so avoiding the voiding of their efforts.