British Champs map scales

[awk]

In the light of the news about the 1:10000 maps at the British Champs, I emailed both the chairman of the BOF map group and the event co-ordinator, asking for clarification, and expressing major disappointment at the decision.

I've received a reply from Jon Musgrave, who clarifed the people responsible for the decision:

"I agree wholeheartedly with your comments, however after long deliberations and despite appeals from planners and mapper BOF map group has spoken."

Frankly, I think map group have completely lost the plot.

[RJ]

Personally I fully respect (well, accept) Map group's decision.... whatever it is. They consider the facts, have the knowledge to make a sensible decision (don't they?).

However....... what criteria do they use to determine the scale to be used. Do they base it on 'their ability' to read a particular map at their meetings, under good lighting conditions? Or do they compete with the map at something close to race pace and then decide it is perfectly OK at 1:10 etc? Or do they ask a particular elite orienteer(s) what they think; whether they will be able to compete successfully using the particular scale?

What evidence do they elicit when making their decision? Do they just consult the IOF handbook and read page 43? Whatever they do they will surely think long and hard, consider all the opinions.... surely?

Are we being silly in our criticism? Maybe we should learn to read the map at the scale given.

BUT IT IS SO GOOD TO BE ABLE TO READ THE MAP, AND NAVIGATE, WHILE RUNNING!!!!!!!

[IanD]

It's a great shame that BOF map group have taken it upon themselves to downgrade the British Championship for older age classes, by ensuring that only those with good eyesight for their age will be able to compete effectively. Let's hope that BOF Council have the sense to override them.

Orienteering is supposed to be a test of running navigation, not of eyesight.

[graeme]

Personally I'm delighted.

I've been dithering for ages whether to run the British Champs (21 years since my first go, when Kitch was defending Champion) or the age groups champs (which I hate missing - we must be the only sport where you cant do both?). Eventually, I went for age group, because as RJ says, its much nicer to be able to read the map (and Big Jon won't be ridiculously far ahead for a change). Cue dismal feelings of mortality. But now that there's no scale advantage its back to M21E! Hurrah! I feel younger already!

But I am bit sorry for the rest of you...

Graeme

[awk]

Maybe we should learn to read the map at the scale given.

How, when you can't see the map properly? This isn't about something one can learn to do - it's about a physical issue that affects pretty much everybody. I have spent many years dealing with eyesight issues, and accepting that because I am in a minority, then it's something I've got to deal with. This is not the case here.

Personally I fully respect (well, accept) Map group's decision.... whatever it is. They consider the facts, have the knowledge to make a sensible decision (don't they?).

I certainly don't accept unless it is properly justified - and this hasn't been, at least not yet. Others I respect in the Scottish organising team, obviously feel differently to map group; my own experience last summer running on the adjacent area screams out that map group has got it wrong. I've seen far too many decisions made by BOF committees over the past 2 or more decades which have needed later revamping to accept what looks all too like another one. Whatever the arguments over legibility, the fact of the matter is that if the map is sufficiently complex to warrant 1:10k for the elite, then there is surely no practical excuse not to enlarge for older competitors.

As for you Graeme, you may feel younger, but it won't make any difference to your ability to read the map!

[Foreman]

I've just dug out my Culbin map from the Scottish 6 days which for Course 7, ( M65L, M70L, M45S, M50S, M55S, W45L,W50L,W55L,W21S W35S) was 1:7500. I'm struggling to read some of the detail and I'm sitting still in a brightly lit room! I hope there is a change of heart for us oldies.

[greywolf]

From the minutes of Map Groups meetings:

June 2007: BOC 2008 It was felt that there was no need to have a 1:7500 scale of Culbin...... It was suggested that an adviser could look at the terrain after Spey 2007 to provide feedback.

November 2007: BOC2008 – scale, content and legibility discussed at length. Report will be circulated to personnel involved

Date of next meeting: late Feb 2008....

[SJC]

Let's hope that BOF Council have the sense to override them.

Unlikely, as BOF Council no longer exists.
Does anyone have any idea who is in a position to get map group to change their minds ?

[Paul Frost]

If we are going to be really strict with the IOF rules then the under 45's should really get a 1:15,000 map.

The rules require that over 45's shall get a larger scale map than the under 45's if 1:15,000 is used, why is that?
Could it be a recognition of failing eyesight as one gets older?
If it is, then the rules need to be re-written to say that a larger scale shall be provided for 45's and above.
If it's not, what is the reason?

If the planners and mapper believe that 1:10,000 is required due to the complexity of the terrain/map and that over 45's should have a 1:7,500 does that count for nothing?

Are we certain that the British Champs have to comply with this section of the IOF rules?
What are the consequences of using common sense and bending the IOF rules?

How about, all over 45's entries are made non-competitive and they are given a 1:7,500 map!
Then we just have a friendly competition between ourselves.

I should declare a personal interest here, as I often need the magnifier as well as my contacts.

[Tatty]

Any chance of a response here from one of those who made the decision

[awk]

Any chance of a response here from one of those who made the decision

I have emailed the chairman, Colin Spears,via his BOF email address: mapgroup@britishorienteering.org.uk but have yet to receive a reply - earlyish days though. However, a few more emails might wake the system up. The others in map group are listed in the most recent minutes as Bruce Bryant, Rod Postlethwaite, David Olivant, Erik Peckett, Peter Roberts, Christine Roberts, Robert Dove. I've tried contacting one or two, but to no avail so far. I don't think any are active on these boards.

Given the timescales, things may already be too late to bring some sense to this, but it's worth a try. I for one will find it hard to forgive if they get this, the most promising competition of the year, wrong. After all, that would be two years in a row, given the ghastly map we had to contend with last year.

[Mrs H]

I don't think any are active on these boards.

One of them certainly is

[NeilC]

IOF rules imply that over 45's shouldn't get 1:15000 maps but 1:10000 is OK for all races, thus if under 45s get a 1:10000 map for a middle race then over 45s should still only get a 1:10000.

However I suspect that this ruling is based on symbol size not clarity of mapping

BOCs are not World Ranking Events and so IOF rules do not need to be adhered to absolutely, although most are there for good reason (or at least good intentions). However since the rules are being 'broken' to allow a 1:10000 map for the elite long race then it would seem that the spirit of rule 15.8 would be to allow a 1:7500 for the over 45s.

Others that might benefit from a 1:10000 map being used for all are UltraSport and CompassPoint who may need to stock up on magnifiers.

[RJ]

It would appear that Map Group are admirably qualified to make this decision...... collectively they are M70, M50, M50, M60, M70, M60, W55 and M60. They all have years of experience making maps, surveying and cartography. Who are we to criticize????

If any group of people with failing eyesight is better qualified.... please step forward!!!

But the thing is..... what criteria are they using to help them make the decision. Is it their ability to read one of these maps on the run, during competition? {One of the group only does Trail-O} Are they just following the rules and guidelines set out in the IOF handbook, page 102?

We need to define more clearly what we are trying to achieve by using an enlarged scale. For me..... I want to be able to run and navigate at the same time. At Bouth I could do that with a 1:7500 scale map. AND IT WAS A JOY.... A REAL BUZZ..... AND WHY I ORIENTEER!!!

[graeme]

Who are we to criticize????
If any group of people with failing eyesight is better qualified.... please step forward!!!

Since we haven't seen the map, we're ill placed to criticize. But there is a difference of opinion between well qualified folk,
so it comes down to whether we better trust the map group or the mapper/coordinator (Jon Musgrave M45).

All we have to go on is past record ... e.g. Jon was responsible for the maps at the 6-day, map group for the maps at BOC and JK.
Take your pick.

What will happen next? Either Jon will spend hours making the map legible at 1:10000, and it will be brilliant, he'll prove himself wrong
and map group will get the credit. Or he won't bother (he is a professional, and nobody's paying) and the results will just say "told you so".

Graeme

(and yes, I did tell the organisers to go for the smaller map scale last time I controlled...)