Choice of scale at Graythwaite National!!

[RJ]

.......the debate on the use of 1:7500 for older competitors. There is little evidence to support any of the arguments.

Why is this 'scale debate' creating so much 'heartache'?

The Cumbrian Galoppen event on Sunday at The Penrith Beacon used 1:7500 maps for all the courses. The map could have been 1:10000, but would have been A5 approx. As it was, it fitted neatly onto A4, was extremely readable and gave a GREAT orienteering experience. I found it very enjoyable.... and is that not the whole point of the exercise.... participant enjoyment.... and in fact is that not one of the main aims of BOF's strategy for the future. Whether I would have enjoyed it as much using a smaller map at 1:10000..... I doubt. I would have needed to stop more frequently to examine the detail.

Evidence needs to be gathered to allow informed debate on the map scales used at major events. In that context, Events Committee welcomes the imaginative initiative of LOC but such an experiment is not appropriate to a National Level event. A survey of participants will be carried out to obtain feedback on the maps. A similar process will be undertaken at other events during 2009."

......'a survey of participants will be carried out'...... Waste of time! If the use of 1:7500 has upset/angered/disturbed participants at Cumbrian Galoppens over the last several years then we would have heard about it. There are bound to be a few who would like the 'more conventional' scale to be used..... but, by and large, there has been general support for the smaller scales. Generally the participant experience has been good.... and numbers are increasing.

So what is the problem... Map Group? Do you need to orienteer more.... in the NW?

What is it about 1:10000 that is so special/important/sacrosanct? ......it is just a NICE convenient ROUND figure.... that's all!

[Homer]

Has a decision been made whether the event will retain it's status as Northern Champs?
If not, where will they be? If it still is the Northern Champs, the sanction doesn't really seem to have any effect.

[Tatty]

Are they charging National event prices?

[EddieH]

My contributions to this thread have all been asides I have done and still express no opinion.

However I am concerned that the organisers have attempted to make their event as user friendly as they think possible, and I only hope that the reaction has not made any of them think "Never again". I admire their stand and hoep that they will all end up feeling satisfied that the punters have come and had a great day. I will not be there simply because I have another commitment that weekend, bt I would like to support LOC.

[EddieH]

My contributions to this thread have all been asides I have done and still express no opinion.

However I am concerned that the organisers have attempted to make their event as user friendly as they think possible, and I only hope that the reaction has not made any of them think "Never again". I admire their stand and hoep that they will all end up feeling satisfied that the punters have come and had a great day. I will not be there simply because I have another commitment that weekend, bt I would like to support LOC.

[RichT]

I have to say that I am not totally objective in this matter.

I am North West Fixtures Secretary.
I am optically challenged in being both short-sighted and partially red/green colour-blind.
I do strongly support the use of larger map scales for older competitors now being an M50.
I can see the point that one is not running exactly the same race through offering a choice of map scale, but by enforcing a smaller scale then I would be penalised not for my navigation or running ability but by my sight.
Orienteering should not be a sight test.
Providing a 1:7500 scale for all older competitors, whilst allowing the option of them taking a smaller scale of 1:10000, removes the sight handicap.

I do feel that the Northern Champs should be held on an area which will provide a true challenge, and where the winners will be worthy champions.
The terrain in Graythwaite, combined with a team of Carol, Tony & Sue will provide an event worthy of the name.

It is my intention to let the Graythwaite event retain its Northern Champs status.

I cannot see why entry fees would change but then I am not the Organiser.

I believe it will continue to be used as a round of the 2009 FCC.

There will still be a BOF Coaching day in Bishop Woods on Saturday April 18th to allow some delightful training through the bluebells at the end of the JK week.

I have no idea whether there will be any Ranking Points associated with the event as the new Ranking system seems to have found its own black hole.

If you love running through sunlit woods (fingers crossed about the weather) then this weekend should provide a slice of Orienteering heaven.

Keep smiling
Richard

[Gross]

Best thing is to just go & run.... it's a great area

[keever]

I really don't see why people are so against giving everyone an equal chance to compete and enjoy orienteering. I'm 19 and there is nothing wrong with my eye sight but i wouldn't want people not able to compete againt me because their eyesight wasn't as good as mine. Ok maybe there isn't any reason to offer 1:10,000 to M/W21 if the 1:15,000 was clear enough 5 years ago, but if an older competitor (with deteriorating eyesight) wants to have a go at the most challenging (open) course they should be given a reasonable chance to.
I think all the people who are objecting are scared they'll get beat more often by others who's eyesight isn't as good as theirs.

[distracted]

I think all the people who are objecting are scared they'll get beat more often by others who's eyesight isn't as good as theirs.

This decision has not been made by Map Group on an eyesight argument. It has been made on a mapping argument.

If an area such as Graythwaite can support a National (and in this case International) Event at classic distance then, where possible, it should be surveyed and mapped for use at 1:15000, and should be clear to read at this scale for the relevant classes. It should then be expected that it will be perfectly clear to read at 1:10000.

I agree that in some cases - Culbin being a good example - that this isn't a suitable solution because of the level of detail and complexity of the area...

[graeme]

Unfortunately it's not a very good mapping argument.

The question of whether Graythwaite could be mapped at 1:15000 for an international event was addressed when the World Cup was held there. The answer, from the IOF, was that it could not.

edit I'm told by someone who probably knows better than I do that it was the mapper who decided to map at 1:10000 and the IOF grudgingly accepted it. Either way...

The area was therefore surveyed and mapped for use at 1:10000 for the Classic distance World Cup race. The map has been updated since, but not simplified or AFAIK made more legible.

If the recent mapping decision was that "it should be surveyed and mapped for use at 1:15000" then that decision should have been made with enough time for such surveying and mapping to have been possible.

[distracted]

Let's agree on something - it ultimately comes down to (emphasis added):

...the requirements for the orienteering map: its content, the need for accuracy, the level of detail and above all the need for legibility

The map must show the features which are obvious on the ground and which are of value from the point of view of map reading.

and, perhaps most importantly:

The map must contain the features which are obvious on the ground to a competitor at speed.

Some of us feel that this is achievable for an area such as Graythwaite on a 1:15000 map, given its complexity relative to other areas where this has been achieved. Some clearly don't...

[awk]

Personally, I couldn't give a toss what grade British Orienteering list the Graythwaite event at. They're all to cock anyway. The listing of an event as a "National Event" is not and never has been a guarantee of quality, and to define 'quality' on the basis of whether a 1:10k or 1:15k map used says it all. A classic example of a committee wielding power where it can, rather than where they need to. What I do know is that Graythwaite will be a quality event and one not to miss, whereas many National Events have been complete non-events.

Which leaves there only 3 old-style national events to go: Burnham, the Scottish Champs and Cannock all on its lonesome in December (we've decided to downgrade ours in September to a regional event, because we want to adopt the new system asap, where the national events are the area champs - which means Graythwaite should be a national event on that basis alone - and didn't see the point of sustaining the old system into the latter reaches of the year.

[Oldman]

The listing of an event as a "National Event" is not and never has been a guarantee of quality, and to define 'quality' on the basis of whether a 1:10k or 1:15k map used says it all.

You make your point cleverly, awk, but it is not a fair statement.

Nowhere in the public statements I've seen is there any reference to "maintaining quality". I suspect the Committee would readily acknowledge this was and will still be a quality event. I think what's happened is much clearer when you notice (as in the BOF statement) that there are Rules for National Events, LOC was asked to follow them, and didn't. Not to downgrade the event was the route to anarchy.

[Neil M40]

The listing of an event as a "National Event" is not and never has been a guarantee of quality

Unfortunately true, but under the relaunching of the National Events as grade 1 events it is to be hoped that standards will be enforced a bit more rigourously. In this case though I think BOF have scored a bit of an own goal - apart from the map scale, everything else about Graythwaite would have made for an excellent National Event. Surely some kind of compromise could have been reached.

It would be shame if BOF stuck to rigidly enforcing the rules while letting the more subjective requirements slide. We will end up with what we had before - National Events on indifferent areas with indifferent maps, but all at the right scale and the requisite number of toilets.

[awk]

Nowhere in the public statements I've seen is there any reference to "maintaining qaulity". I suspect the Committee would readily acknowledge this was and will still be a quality event. I think what's happened is much clearer when you notice (as in the BOF statement) that there are Rules for National Events, LOC was asked to follow them, and didn't.

You're quite right Oldman. However, the emphasis in the statement is on British Orienteering's "quality" events, with the strong implication that this is what the rules are for. Having run in quite a large number of BO "quality" events, where the map hasn't been one to which I would have applied the word "quality" (but where the scale has been rigidly stuck to), and others where the opposite has applied, it seems to me that the rules have not managed to ensure that BO's "quality" events actually lead the way in quality.

AIUI the rule that has been offended is that submission was made to Map Group, who refused, not that the enlarged scale was to be used. The point is that Map Group are applying letters of law, rather than ensuring the map is readable or of good quality. Events Committee are merely backing Map Group up. It could be argued that Map Group were reducing the quality of the competition by sticking to the letter of the law - which would surely offend the spirit of the laws even if not the letter. Personally, I would rather go to a regional event where the quality standards have been upheld, than to a national event where the rules have been obeyed, but the quality lowered. I think NeilM40's got it absolutely right.

The statement also says that a strong emphasis was put on the fairness of different runners using different scales. As you know ( ) I think that's complete rubbish: it's perfectly fair for the reason that everybody has access to any of the scales (it would only be fair if some couldn't choose one of the scales), especially as that is all that is different.

As for anarchy: that would only apply if one believed in not having laws. It doesn't apply where one believes a law is bad or badly applied. After all, another definition of anarchy is "a state of disorder; chaos" (Oxford Shorter). British Orienteering is quite capable of creating anarchy without the help of LOC or any other club!!