rf_fozzy wrote:...We made the decision that 65+ needed 1:3000 and so that meant Course 4. To keep things simple, instead of faffing about with different maps for different classes on course 4 (already hard enough), we made the decision that we would give everyone on the course a 1:3000 map.
So yes, W55, W60 and W14 are getting a bigger scale map than perhaps they should do. You know what - IT DOESN'T MATTER. You aren't competing against them. You will both have the same scale map as everyone else in your class. It will be a fair competition....
This is a perfectly rational approach, and I agree it may be premature to decide in advance if it is, or isn't, justified.
For forest events we have a long-established principle that a 1:15000 scale needs to be increased to 1:10000 for ages 45+. If the equivalents needed for sprint maps are say 1:5000 and 1:4000 then for this event no-one should have an issue, because everyone has at least their recommended scale. But if they are 1:5000 and 1:3000 (and you might expect it to be 1:3333) then awk has a justiiable point and it won't be a fair competition if only some of the M50/55s (and M/W45s) are unable to read the map clearly.
The concern for me would be the idea that the age threshold for readability should be at age 65 and not 45. Not sure there is any medical justification for this? We don't require forest scales to increase further to 1:7500 at 65+ (even if the latter is sometimes happening in practice).