Ordnance Survey offers free use of map data

[EddieH]

Gross wrote: "That must be a WOC99 map "

No they're another story, but in the end they were pretty brilliant in the WOC bits and definitely usable elsewhere.

I doubt you have ever been to the area I am thinking of.

[andy]

Come on then Mharky - if there are so many poor maps out there lets have you naming all these areas and bad mappers. Nothing like a bit of libel to enliven a slow afternoon.

mharky's having a go at himself more than anyone else, or at least using himself as an example...

I've never got lost because of bad mapping on Edinburgh Old Town, can't be that bad..!

[graeme]

The Edinburgh city map is a good case in point showing valid reasons why maps aren't as good as they can be.

I'd been looking to get it made for many years, but no club backing. So, the choice was not between a professional map and an amateur map - it was between amateur map and no map.

Mark has said he started his 1:2000 map for training. For this purpose its fine. But ISSOM is very rigid: e.g. at 1:5000 a 2m passageway between uncrossible walls (0.4mm) is completely filled by wall symbol. There are plenty of these in Edinburgh... So the whole thing had to be redrawn. It's not that Mark's map was wrong - just that it was made for one purpose and unusable for others when printed at a smaller scale. This is a common problem ... especially at level 1 events .

In other places, the map has bits I surveyed before ISSOM was invented. Like Mark says, it should really be redone from scratch to ISSOM, rather than updated to the new symbols. But if people like Andy can't see the problems, the incentive to spend hours on redoing the map is low.

Elsewhere, I deliberately ignored ISSOM - it is simply impossible to get all the uncrossible walls in at the right width, even if they're drawn in slightly the wrong place. I really don't know the best solution - since most runners don't know ISSOM either we seem to get away with the non-ISSOM widths.

Sometimes things are just wrong - like the north lines being grid north. But Level 1 professional maps aren't immune to this either.

Finally, the contours. It's an art, and some people, including me and the OS, just can't do them as well as other. Amateur mappers generally have less clout in demanding good basemaps i.e. not OS, so they have a harder job.

[mharky]

It's not that Mark's map was wrong

Well... it was in places, but that's only because Edinburgh Council keep building things without telling me!

Don't get me started on Edinburgh contours!

[RJ]

At the moment we have an ideal opportunity to set, demand and ensure that maps for the premier events meet a 'standard'. We have very few of these new Level 1 and 2 events, and there is a desire to make them 'top notch'. All other events are level 3, and for the moment it perhaps doesn't matter that the mapping isn't up to standard for them.

So.... for an event to get a level 2 status it must have a good map, drawn to the appropriate specification, and judged to be 'fit for purpose' by a adjudicaton panel. It would appear that Major Events/Competitions Group want to have loads of fringe benefits for these events, like commentry etc. Let's start with the basics.... a good area that will meet the demands of the level of competition being asked for, and then a good map drawn to the standards to guarantee good, fair competition.

It is only a handful of events each year that need to be looked at.... and a lot of them have existing maps where there will be an existing 'opinion' on their suitability.

[EddieH]

I made 1 orienteering map - it's pretty dreadful, although the spiral contour is not particularly a problem

I had a control on a contour junction in VMC (now called World Masters OC) in Sweden.

The planner must have thought it was hidden by the boulder, but I was very unsure what height to expect it at.

[mharky]

Aye,

If maps for the top events are of the appropriate standard then these will be used for subsequent smaller events.

Scotland is lucky, not only do we have some of the best mappers, but we also have the 6-Days every 2 years which means there is money to get maps made properly. I don't know who owns the Dalruzion map, but they can now use this for wee events over the next few years but still have a quality map.

Another thing about amateur mapping, time constraints. If you are under contract then you have dead-lines. If you aint, you don't.

[SeanC]

Adjudication panels. noooooo, orienteering has enough committees already

Surely the existing procedure is fine? If the controller thinks the map isn't good enough then downgrade the event. Just one person to make the decision. Presumably things are rarely this black and white, a controller and planner can work with a map with some weaknesses, so long as the weaknesses are identified - eg avoid the badly mapped areas and confusing features. More work for everyone but avoids downgrading or cancelling an event. It seems to me that the controller is much more efficient and flexible method than a committee.

Perhaps controllers don't have enough guidance on what is an acceptable map for level 1/2? I have no idea - would any like to comment?

[EddieH]

Yes SeanC I agree with you. Nothing's perfect but getting committes involved will NOT be an improvement.

In the end the map is ALWAYS a compromise - cost or time consttraints are inevitable. Let's face it the JK maps were far from ideal but most people seem to have thoroughly enjoyed the weekend, and I can't recall anyone bemoaning losing because of the map (not that that would necessarily be true even if they did).

Without any doubt at all I lost out at WMOC 07 through bad cartography on a brilliantly surveyed map - it was just one of those things. Let's face it cricket has far more of these than orienteering and maybe it is one of the things that can make a long slow game so interesting.

[RJ]

Adjudication panels. ....... If the controller thinks the map isn't good enough.....

In this case the adjudication panel has ONE member. It doesn't have to be a committee..... and I quite agree, a committee would be a bad idea! However, leaving it up to the controller alone is quite onorous. Much better that it is a person or persons not connected with the event so that they aren't going to get blamed for saying the map isn't good enough.

When an area and a map are accepted as 'good enough' for a level 2 event by the controller of the 'adjudication panel' there will always be a body of 'Nopesport opinion' that will disagree. And to be fair to all the maps and mappers out there with the current stock of maps it is only the 'Nopesport opinion' that is swaying the arguement. Sure some maps are less than perfect, but 'Nopesport opinion' can be rather too harsh and pedantic.

However, to return to my original point.... Now, with the new event structure being defined we have an opportunity to make sure we set a 'standard' for everything to do with the level 2 event, and to 'insist' the standards are maintained. Venues and maps should be vetted for these events.... and by a 'group', 'panel' or whatever to ensure the standard is maintained. A lone controller is a brave person if (s)he downgrades an event for reasons of inadequate quality!!

[Homer]

Venues and maps should be vetted for these events.... and by a 'group', 'panel' or whatever

Sounds dangerously like a committee!

Who do you think is going to do this?
MEG will do this sort of thing for Level 1 events, but it's too much to ask a BOF committee/group/panel (or whatever) to do this for all Level 2 events as well.
That only leaves individual clubs or the regional associations......

As most people agree we have enough committees already, it really has to come down to market forces. One factor in deciding which events I attend is the likely standard of the map (as well as terrain, distance from home, etc). Hopefully clubs will eventually realise the benefit of having their areas mapped to the highest possible standard.

[RJ]

I like your response Homer. Let's just leave everything exactly as it is, and let it evolve. 'Nopesport opinion' can be the driving force then!!

[mharky]

How about the people who actually have to orienteer on the maps make an assessment.

You can't work out if a map is crap by sitting round a table. You have to be out in the forest.

You can't rely on the planner, anyone run the Scottish Individual Champs on Tentsmuir?

You can't rely on controllers, anyone run the Scottish Individual Champs on Tentsmuir?

You could stop crap mappers mapping in the first place, and then maps wouldn't have to be classed as unsuitable.

The JK maps were crap, you're right. But you can't say that it wasn't a problem because people still enjoyed the JK no one lost because of it. Bad maps in top level races shouldn't be "just one of those things"

If we don't take our sport seriously how can we expect non orienteers to?

[gg]

Another thing I have experienced is that when I have made a map at 1:4,000 for example, the club have printed it at 1:5,000 (or whatever) which means all the symbols are the wrong size and suddenly the map is very hard to read. Also I have come across complex areas which are readable with professional printing, but on the club's 'home' printer, suddenly gaps were almost invisible and the quality disappeared completely.

It is not all down to the original map, but what is done with it sometimes!

[roadrunner]

If the map isn't up to standard, is downgrading the event really a solution?

Imagine it was the British Sprints or BEOC, for example: maps often aren't available all that long before the event, so by the time it was downgraded, it would probably be too late to organise a replacement, some people would have booked travel/accommodation and so on. We would end up not having a top class event on a crap map, but I don't think anyone would be very happy with the outcome, and it wouldn't do the image of the sport any good at all.