Scottish 6 Days
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
Re: Scottish 6 Days
I think the basic issue is that red/white striped tape can be fairly easily purloined from work which makes it the cheapest option for most tape requirements. Often used for crossing points in my experience.
Orienteering - its no walk in the park
- andypat
- god
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:58 pm
- Location: Houston, we have a problem.
Re: Scottish 6 Days
I do find using red/white for crossing points in some instances and for "don't cross" in others is confusing.
I like the idea of don't cross any stripy (bicolour) tape.
Crossing point in flouro green fo go?
I like the idea of don't cross any stripy (bicolour) tape.
Crossing point in flouro green fo go?
- Karen
- red
- Posts: 195
- Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 10:50 am
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Freefall wrote:At the S6D we had red, green blue, white and yellow tape on route to starts and marked routes with these colours.
I'd suggest avoiding pure yellow where possible - when used on its own for the route through the forest to the WRE start on Day 3, I actually found the yellow tape pretty hard to pick out against the vegetation. On the other hand, I appreciate that there are a finite number of distinct barrier-tape colours available...
British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering.
"If only you were younger and better..."
"If only you were younger and better..."
-
Scott - god
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:43 am
- Location: in the queue for the ice-cream van
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Freefall said :-
Surely the gorge/stream was marked as un-crossable because it was considered to be dangerous - therefore yellow/black tape would have been appropriate.
Personally I don't think that we should have to resort to taping in such situations - it is a huge amount of work for an already stretched, mainly voluntary organisation.
Experience tells us that these sort of incidents happen all too often for what ever reason - I am sure there are several threads on here bemoaning people crossing walls in the Lake District. Surely it would be better to plan a course that makes it impossible or less likely.
Just checked the rules and Yellow and Black refers to Dangerous Features
Surely the gorge/stream was marked as un-crossable because it was considered to be dangerous - therefore yellow/black tape would have been appropriate.
Personally I don't think that we should have to resort to taping in such situations - it is a huge amount of work for an already stretched, mainly voluntary organisation.
Experience tells us that these sort of incidents happen all too often for what ever reason - I am sure there are several threads on here bemoaning people crossing walls in the Lake District. Surely it would be better to plan a course that makes it impossible or less likely.
"O wad some Pow'r the giftie gie us
To see oursels as others see us!"
Robert Burns
To see oursels as others see us!"
Robert Burns
- Jethro
- green
- Posts: 302
- Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2006 5:26 pm
- Location: Among the Hills
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Jethro wrote:
Experience tells us that these sort of incidents happen all too often for what ever reason - I am sure there are several threads on here bemoaning people crossing walls in the Lake District. Surely it would be better to plan a course that makes it impossible or less likely.
An obvious and sensible suggestion that has indeed been often repeated.
- Gnitworp
- addict
- Posts: 1095
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:20 am
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Jethro wrote:Experience tells us that these sort of incidents happen all too often for what ever reason - I am sure there are several threads on here bemoaning people crossing walls in the Lake District. Surely it would be better to plan a course that makes it impossible or less likely.
I wouldn't disagree that planning that makes an illegal route the quickest should (at least in general) be avoided - you might say that making the legal route(s) most efficient is the carrot...
...but... I can't help feeling that the stick needs to be there too: that competitors need to know that transgression really is likely to result in disqualification. This side seems to be a bit lacking at the moment, not just in the present case but going back over at least several years (BOC 2016 at Brown Clee comes to mind).
That said, I'm sure that the vast majority of orienteers will naturally honour the restrictions on crossing points, OOBs etc. that apply at various events out of a sense of fair play and understanding of the wider consequences that breaches may have. It just remains to get the message across to the few that don't, for whatever reasons (which can include a lack of clarity over what's allowed and what's not - it's not always disregard for the rules!). And I don't think that lack of enforcement helps in getting that message across.
- ricardito
- white
- Posts: 61
- Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2018 9:04 am
- Location: Between the river and the wood
Re: Scottish 6 Days
ricardito wrote:Jethro wrote: Surely it would be better to plan a course that makes it impossible or less likely.
I wouldn't disagree that planning that makes an illegal route the quickest should (at least in general) be avoided - you might say that making the legal route(s) most efficient is the carrot...
...but... I can't help feeling that the stick needs to be there too: that competitors need to know that transgression really is likely to result in disqualification. And I don't think that lack of enforcement helps in getting that message across.
Agree with both these points in general.
People who self DQ for breaking the rules whether inadvertently or not should really remain DQ in my opinion, although in urban in particular its often a fairly grey area with the competitors actions being influenced by a disconnect between the map and whats actually in front of them on the ground. I'm not sure where the greyness was in this case.
I've put Day 2 of the S6D in my controller folder for future reference to remind me what can happen in this sort of situation. Always good to learn from these incidents.
Orienteering - its no walk in the park
- andypat
- god
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:58 pm
- Location: Houston, we have a problem.
Re: Scottish 6 Days
For people who self DQ, voluntarily or otherwise, what do people think about whether these should stay in the results list?
I know of one race where a person self DQd (after being "invited to re view their route" and asked for their name to be completely removed from results, giving the impression they hadn't even been there.
I know of one race where a person self DQd (after being "invited to re view their route" and asked for their name to be completely removed from results, giving the impression they hadn't even been there.
- DM
- brown
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 2:47 pm
Re: Scottish 6 Days
..and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us;
and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil...
and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil...
Fac et Spera. Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Scottish 6 Days Assistant Coordinator
-
Freefall - addict
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:08 pm
- Location: Scotland
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Put controls on the crossing points.
British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering.
"If only you were younger and better..."
"If only you were younger and better..."
-
Scott - god
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:43 am
- Location: in the queue for the ice-cream van
Re: Scottish 6 Days
DM wrote:For people who self DQ, voluntarily or otherwise, what do people think about whether these should stay in the results list?
I have argued that people who voluntarily disqualify themselves to be marked as "withdrawn" in the results which should be seen as an honourable status rather than DSQ, which, if not accompanied by a list of missing or wrong controls, is not!
-
Mrs H - god
- Posts: 2972
- Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2005 3:30 pm
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Scott wrote:Put controls on the crossing points.
But the planner/controller will have sleepless nights because they will have lost the opportunity to set a 'route choice' leg
- Gnitworp
- addict
- Posts: 1095
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:20 am
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Having controls on the crossing points is not inherently incompatible with having a choice of crossing points. I refuse to believe that nobody can come up with a clear way of marking on a map that "you must visit any one of these two/three/etc controls".
British Orienteering Director | Opinions expressed on here are entirely my own, and do not represent the views of British Orienteering.
"If only you were younger and better..."
"If only you were younger and better..."
-
Scott - god
- Posts: 2388
- Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 4:43 am
- Location: in the queue for the ice-cream van
Re: Scottish 6 Days
DM wrote:For people who self DQ, voluntarily or otherwise, what do people think about whether these should stay in the results list?
Why not? In athletics, the equivalent might be runnning into the inside lane (inadvertently shortening their course and inviting a disqualification) they wouldnt be removed from the results - it would simply say DQ.
Orienteering - its no walk in the park
- andypat
- god
- Posts: 2856
- Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 9:58 pm
- Location: Houston, we have a problem.
Re: Scottish 6 Days
Freefall wrote:(an easily made cartographic oversight in Condes?)
Except it wasn't a cartographic oversight, Freefall, the "gap" was simply to better highlight the crossing point, making it more visible on the map.
just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get you...
- AndyO
- green
- Posts: 346
- Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2005 10:05 pm
- Location: Howe o' the Mearns
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 22 guests