BOC 2008 maps - Stupid Decision

[seabird]

To me the JK Leith Hill 1:10000 map was a perfect illustration of an unreadable map in the detailed areas, for those of us with deteriorating eyesight. I constantly simply had to navigate to the centre of the circle, being unable to read the surrounding features.

Having said that my mavigational errors, with one exception, were all in the easy-to-read parts of the map!

Whether the map would have been significantly clearer with litho printing would be interesting to know. (I'm assuming it was laser printed).

I feel either a 1:7500 map was needed or at least a blow up of the detailed areas to 1:7500 on the back of the map - if the overall size of the map would have been too great at 1:7500.

[MIE]

Days 1, 2 and 3 (Sprint, Leith Hill and Ashdown) were all off-set litho printing
Day 4 (Relays at Eridge Old Park) was a laser print

[awk]

I'd agree with seabird. It was an excellent event, super planning, absolutely no complaints at all. It would have been further enhanced by having a 1:7.5k map, and being able to see the lines and symbols in the complex areas. Not an issue of interpretation, simply one of being able to see, especially in those areas where there was a green overlay. I found myself on more than one occasion simply navigating to the centre of the circle, and using out and in techniques not just to be safe (part of strategy decided on before the race) but because I couldn't see the lines/symbols even using a magnifier.

An interesting experience, and one that for me further underlined the need to review the rules/guidelines on map scales for older competitors.

[RS]

When comparing routes on Friday, I discovered that my circles were slightly to the right of my daughter's. For example, that's why inside corner looked like outside corner when not checking descriptions! How can this happen on professionally printed maps?

[Patrick]

When comparing routes on Friday, I discovered that my circles were slightly to the right of my daughter's. For example, that's why inside corner looked like outside corner when not checking descriptions! How can this happen on professionally printed maps?

Because the offset litho process does each colour separately. It only takes a tiny misalignment of the paper between the different colours going on to give this effect, and it's only because we've so quickly become used to the consistency of laser printing that this comes as a surprise. Laser printing gives you absolute control over what gets printed, but the print quality is (generally) noticeably lower. Litho printing is beautifully clear, but sacrifices absolute accuracy of registration.

What your comment really illustrates is the importance of reading the whole description, especially in a sprint race.

Cheers,

Patrick

[MacMan]

What is said above by Patrick is correct, however in this case the slight variant was a result in the time delay between producing the 5 colour print and then doing the overlay. In an attempt to recover some time, we printed the "base map" i.e. the 5 primary colour plates, and then some of the overprints were completed the following day. However in that time the paper contracted and the we then had some mismatch in the overprint.
If you look - there should be little to no movement in the 5 colours - however on the purple we did have some movement.

This was not a "pure" offset so I had to check every map and all 4 registration marks on every map. Where the registration was bad, and the position was not clear using the description I rejected it. If your map got through and was particualar bad I'm sorry; it was easy to get "map blind" trying to check every one.

On course 4 and 6 I rejected every map - these were reprinted (thanks Alan H) - when we reprinted all 6 colours were done as one - and the registration was perfect.

One person called for me at the finish on the day, and I explained the problem and viewed their suspect control which showed a 0.5mm shift(approx!). However in combination with the description we both agreed that the position of the control circle was acceptable.

For me and (Alan H) we had a learning experince, and will be communicated to future major event teams.

Steve

[Harley]

Totally agree with Awk and Seabird.
At 1:10000, I had absolutely no chance of deciphering the brown splodges on my map. My only option was to navigate into the circle from the direction I expected others to be exiting and hope to find the control that way - for a top whack entry fee I expect a map I can read.

[roadrunner]

It's interesting to compare the JK map and the previous (1999) JK map. You can see that the new map includes far more detail; like some of the others, I feel that this distracted from the readability.

2008 map

LeithHill001.jpg (249.09 KiB) Viewed 4765 times

1999 map

LeithHill002.jpg (213.96 KiB) Viewed 4766 times

[andy]

It's interesting to compare the JK map and the previous (1999) JK map. You can see that the new map includes far more detail; like some of the others, I feel that this distracted from the readability.

wow, what a difference - no wonder I (and a few others looking at routegadget ) stuttered a few times in there

[Paul Frost]

The Leith Hill map I had for the public races at the World Cup in 2005 was 1:7500 and I thought that was hard to read in the south west part. Fortunately the M50L JK course didn't go into that area.

[graeme]

Compared with 1999, the main thing which makes it illegible is the green screen.
Sadly, there was indeed route-choice affecting undergrowth.

Plus, the old map doesn't show the 2m deep reentrant where my control was.
So I don't think Leith Hill was overmapped.

By contrast, I noticed they took the platforms and isolated trees in the forest off the relay map, and I can't say I noticed any platforms there or in Ashdown.

The only place I couldn't make out the map was some reentrants in the tussocky bit at Ashdown. But it turned out to be one of those topologically-impossible contour triple-junctions, so just blundering is was as good as anything.

[JEP]

The circles on my Leith Hill map for course 20 were 2-3mm out. Wouldn't have made much difference to my apalling run but there was no control desription feature anywhere near the centre of the circle for some controls.

A 1:10,000 map for older competitors for a long course should be fine if the right amount of detail is mapped. There is a continuing issue of overmapping - perhaps because we can. I know this was raised in the lead up to the JK Day 2 event and some detail was taken off in December's survey check but probably not enough.

This issue is of course at the root of the issues with the Culbin map. I suspect it has been severely overmapped for a long race hence the problems with scale. We will have to wait and see. This can change the nature of the race. There really should be a difference in racing style and mapping for sprint (diffeerent map spec anyway),middle and long races which are supposed to test different types of orenteering skill.

[IanD]

I can't say I noticed any platforms there or in Ashdown.

I used a platform as an attack point at Ashdown.

Was I the only one to find the Ashdown map much clearer than Leith Hill?

I recognise that my appalling (lack of) performance at Leith was entirely my own fault, and in fact I managed the complex areas relatively well. None the less, I would have found the combination of complex contours and undergrowth screen much easier to decipher with an enlargement.

Comparing Roadrunner's posted maps, the old one is much easier to read in isolation. However I would respectfully suggest that it doesn't really reflect the terrain. If we have complex contour detail, let's use it to set complex fine navigation problems. So map it, but we should recognise that young and old eyes have different resolutions. I'm leaning to the view that it can never be ideal to produce the same map for all age groups (while recognising that cost and organisational complexity are also important factors).

[Brian Hughes]

Great news about 1:7500 for oldies at Culbin. As an M60 with (probabaly) worse than average eyesight, I had thought that the 600mile journey might have been wasted to run on an unreadable map.

I have no axe to grind (third overall on M60L at JK) but I too found the Leith Hill map very difficult to read in the complex quarries where course 16 spent most of its time. A simplified 1:10 000 map would have been ideal, but i appreciate that that would have entailed a huge extra mapping commitment. A tablecloth size 1:7500 would perhaps have been the best compromise.

As several people have commented, common sense says that if the elite with 20:20 vision require a 1:10 000 map, many 'oldies' are going to have difficulty reading the 1 :10 000 scale.

To widen the debate a little. There is presumably a conflict between the needs of the elite who (I believe) want to run on 1: 15000 as much as possible and the 'oldies' who,unfortunately , make up the majority of the current O population. For example, two of my best O experiences recently were at Regionals at Tankersley(SYO) and Bouth (LOC) in both cases on the 'frowned' upon 1:7500 scale. In both cases it was exhilarating to be able to run at racing speed through complex terrain on a map that was easy to read (and no, I did not win, in both cases thrashed by Julian Lailey). Certainly at Bouth at 1:10000 I would have struggled and at Tankersley at 1:10000 the map would have been unreadable, or if it had been simplified to make it readable the area would have lost its viability. In both cases my peers seemed in uniform approval of the brave decisons made by the mappers when opting for 1:7500.

Surely there are still enough large areas in the UK which can be mapped at 1:15000 to suit the elite and which can be enlarged to 1:10000 (without adding extra detail) so that we 'oldies' can cope. It would be interesting to learn the opinions of some youngsters.

Of course there is always the danger that if 1:7500 becomes more accceptable that mappers (I am no exception) will be tempted to ruin the whole purpose of the scale by over mapping. Clarity in competition conditions, not on the OCAD computer screen is what counts.

Brian Hughes(M60 HOC)

[PG]

I've just had a look at the minutes of the last Rules Group meeting, published on the Brit-O website today, where there was some discussion on this issue.

BOC 2008 map scales:
... it was agreed that Rules Group would ask Map Group to produce a clear explanation of what map scales are expected for the different types of event - Long, Middle, Sprint, Relay - and, more importantly, what size lines and symbols should be used on these maps.
Rules Group interpretation of the current IOF Rules is quite clear in that a map with lines, line screens and symbol dimensions 50% greater than the ISOM specifications is recommended for older age groups (age classes 45 and above) where reading fine lines and small symbols may cause problems, and therefore request that such maps are provided at this year's British Championships.

So Rules Group would appear to be driving force behind the decision. Hopefully this interpretation will be written into the guidelines so that the issue will not arise in future.

If this decision is incorpororated into guidelines, Leith Hill will be the last championship event where vets and juniors will run at the same scale as elite.