Great fun today. The new part of the map suitably challenging and all very enjoyable!
Thanks.
London
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
54 posts
• Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Re: London
Results now up: http://slow.org.uk/racereports/eighthlcrresults/
Stop talking, start running.
-
Angry Haggis - blue
- Posts: 418
- Joined: Thu Feb 05, 2004 11:24 pm
- Location: London
Re: London
I second mikey's comments - a good many interesting challenges in the area.
- roadrunner
- addict
- Posts: 1059
- Joined: Fri Sep 02, 2005 8:30 pm
Re: London
Usual high class event but the first year I have really noticed a bit of gaining an unfair advantage by runners - crossing East Smithfield rather than using the inbounds underpass, runners from the east crossing the uncrossable fence east of 234. The first time traffic has really interferred with my run. But there is always a bit of luck in Urban O.
- ianandmonika
- red
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:03 pm
Re: London
A really really good weekend with 3 excellent and varied events, from fri nights sprint round imperial college with level changes and subterranean controls, to a classic urban in wapping, with some neat challenging control placements to todays park ultrasprint by LOK, an interesting and aMAZING event. However 3*1k followed by 1.3K finale was a bit too far for me.
As to cheating......yes the planner could have beaten it out of the sytem but probably by simplifying the courses to death. I'm of the age when i don't really care, its not the world champs after all, who are they kidding if they do well that way?
Also anyone know how far they actually ran on the m65 course, it seemed a long 5k to me
As to cheating......yes the planner could have beaten it out of the sytem but probably by simplifying the courses to death. I'm of the age when i don't really care, its not the world champs after all, who are they kidding if they do well that way?
Also anyone know how far they actually ran on the m65 course, it seemed a long 5k to me
- johnrobinson
- green
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:09 pm
Re: London
Great course and great event - one of the best, and definitely worth both the journey and the risk (injury problems!). Oodles of variety, and some really challenging problems. I enjoyed every second out on the course! But, but.....
I totally agree with ianandmonika: the cheating was rife. I saw several people crossing the major road clearly marked out of bounds, and many others reported the same. The culprits gained significant time by doing so. This was not a case of misinterpreting urban map symbols, unless bright pink hatching is difficult to interpret for experienced older male runners (which is what most of the transgressors were from the reports). I know of at least one case of abuse from one older male runner when reminded of the rules - they knew exactly what they were doing.
Sadly, it does look as if the planners will have to simplify or compromise to deal with the cheats if the competitive aspect is going to have any meaning - even if, as John says, it's not the world champs. Something clever with controls and underpasses in this case?? Or maybe a couple of observers at the main pinch point near the Tower (if the organising team wasn't already fully stretched!). Even if not catching all, the threat and action on those observed might have a wider effect. Sadly, trust is not enough.
Interestingly, whilst I wasn't at the ultrasprint today, I heard similar about older male competitors equally attempting to cheat, and ignoring the several who tried to remind them. The common age and gender were again rather noticeable!
By older male, I mean my age group (Supervet) and older.
I totally agree with ianandmonika: the cheating was rife. I saw several people crossing the major road clearly marked out of bounds, and many others reported the same. The culprits gained significant time by doing so. This was not a case of misinterpreting urban map symbols, unless bright pink hatching is difficult to interpret for experienced older male runners (which is what most of the transgressors were from the reports). I know of at least one case of abuse from one older male runner when reminded of the rules - they knew exactly what they were doing.
Sadly, it does look as if the planners will have to simplify or compromise to deal with the cheats if the competitive aspect is going to have any meaning - even if, as John says, it's not the world champs. Something clever with controls and underpasses in this case?? Or maybe a couple of observers at the main pinch point near the Tower (if the organising team wasn't already fully stretched!). Even if not catching all, the threat and action on those observed might have a wider effect. Sadly, trust is not enough.
Interestingly, whilst I wasn't at the ultrasprint today, I heard similar about older male competitors equally attempting to cheat, and ignoring the several who tried to remind them. The common age and gender were again rather noticeable!
By older male, I mean my age group (Supervet) and older.
-
awk - god
- Posts: 3224
- Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:29 pm
- Location: Bradford
Re: London
For expenses, I'll come and run behind people hold a huge sign saying "cheat"
-
mharky - team nopesport
- Posts: 4541
- Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2003 3:39 pm
Re: London
It's simpler than that - just put a video camera at the likely infringement points and then put the video up on Utube. I imagine that the shame would put most people off. Oh and you could dq them as well (which is what ought to happen). I wonder if there are any surveillance cameras around there?
- mykind
- orange
- Posts: 113
- Joined: Tue May 04, 2010 10:11 pm
- Location: Keswick
Re: London
.Also anyone know how far they actually ran on the m65 course, it seemed a long 5k to me
7.4 km according to my GPS but it lost the plot now and again amongst the tall buildings and especially in the long underpass to get across the OOB road. That was with just a couple of minor excursions away from the shortest legitimate route. I really feel planners should anticipate the cheating and in this case a control at the south end of the underpass would still have left the route choice of using the Tower Hill underpass instead and given little advantage to anyone risking crossing the road.
- MJG
- white
- Posts: 66
- Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 8:25 am
Re: London
Thanks for that 7.4k sounds about right . i know I lost 2mins due to brain outage (visiting 12 before 11 and then messing up the reverse route ) and found myself fading badly towards the end. Very hard to judge your effort when you can never be sure how far you will have to run. Planning must be hard too, how do you measure all possible routes?
- johnrobinson
- green
- Posts: 301
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:09 pm
Re: London
johnrobinson wrote:Planning must be hard too, how do you measure all possible routes?
The 2drerun course planning tool is very useful here.
http://news.worldofo.com/2015/02/26/int ... ng-module/
- paul
- yellow
- Posts: 88
- Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2007 10:57 am
Re: London
johnrobinson wrote:Planning must be hard too, how do you measure all possible routes?
Easy to do with the tape measure tool in Condes 8 (but doesn't work so well in Condes 9 )
-
greywolf - addict
- Posts: 1416
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:45 pm
- Location: far far away
Re: London
Purple Pen allows this too and we used it to measure and publish optimal course lengths for this year's British Sprints at Aldershot.
Indeed, those with sharp eyes will have spotted that course lengths for both the 2015 JK Sprint and British Sprints were (with agreement) published as "optimal" lengths and not as the straight line distance between controls. This accords with IOF Rules but not with BOF ones.
The reasons for doing so should be obvious ...
Indeed, those with sharp eyes will have spotted that course lengths for both the 2015 JK Sprint and British Sprints were (with agreement) published as "optimal" lengths and not as the straight line distance between controls. This accords with IOF Rules but not with BOF ones.
The reasons for doing so should be obvious ...
- DJM
- diehard
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:19 pm
- Location: Wye Valley
Re: London
DJM wrote:...course lengths for both the 2015 JK Sprint and British Sprints were (with agreement) published as "optimal" lengths and not as the straight line distance between controls. This accords with IOF Rules ...
The IOF rule (16.3) is "shortest possible" which is not always the same as "optimal": "The course lengths shall be given as the length of the straight line from the start via the controls to the finish deviating for, and only for, physically impassable obstructions (high fences, lakes, impassable cliffs etc.), prohibited areas and marked routes."
If the course is in an area with lots of rhododendron or gorse (mapped as 410 Vegetation, very difficult to run) then the IOF rule says course measurement should be straight line (i.e. through the green) not around.
Edit: IMHO "optimal" makes more sense than either the IOF or BOF rules, and the latter is just useless for sprint/urban terrain
And back on thread - planners do have a responsibility to minimise opportunities for shortcuts etc, not least because future permissions might be prejudiced by transgressions, but having marshalls with cameras at a couple of key points and disqualifying offenders might help with enforcement
-
greywolf - addict
- Posts: 1416
- Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 12:45 pm
- Location: far far away
Re: London
then the IOF rules say course measurement should be straight line (i.e. through the green) not around.
- which could well be the optimal route ...
NB I was careful to put "optimal" in quotes because of this very potential discrepancy.
Planning must be hard too, how do you measure all possible routes?
Just as measuring height climb isn't an exact science, neither is measurement of the "shortest possible" route as there has to be a subjective element built into this. A good planner will spot the shortest possible route for many legs pretty quickly and, where complex route choice is involved, the good planner will measure all sensible variations anyway, just to check how good the leg is and to see if any improvements are possible.
This was done for all 38 courses planned for the British Sprints this year and, in the words of one of the planners: "working out Optimum Route distances was very valuable, both for planning correct course lengths and informing the competitors."
IMHO "optimal" makes more sense than either the IOF or BOF rules, and the latter is just useless for sprint/urban terrain
Hear! Hear! I have recently submitted a proposal to change the BOF Rule to be in line with the IOF one again. I accept that using "optimal" makes the meaning subtly better but it makes sense for the BOF and IOF rules to say the same thing.
- DJM
- diehard
- Posts: 979
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:19 pm
- Location: Wye Valley
54 posts
• Page 1 of 4 • 1, 2, 3, 4
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 196 guests