Sheffield City Chase

[JennyJ]

misleading in that it could have just been inside corner like all of the other controls on wall/fence/building corners!

[mikey]

I'm still trying to work out what happened with all the MPs at said control 7 on Course B? What was that all about - it's not clear from Routegadget.

[epocian]

Mikey said

I'm still trying to work out what happened with all the MPs at said control 7 on Course B? What was that all about - it's not clear from Routegadget.

Could it be that this control was one with a very thick chain? I didn't have a problem with it but I reckon I lost 20 secs or so at No 11 on the C course trying to get my SI Card far enough into the control box to register because of the thick chain being used there

[Rockaldo]

I'm still trying to work out what happened with all the MPs at said control 7 on Course B? What was that all about - it's not clear from Routegadget.

This control was without a chain. It is the control being debated earlier on in this thread. For some reason a lot of people thought it was on the south west (easier) side of the wall, despite the control descriptions saying otherwise, and decided that it had been taken and carried on with their course.

Unfortunately Jenny we could not hang it on the inside corner so using that control description would have been wrong.

[Spookster]

And because of the chasing sprint format, my guess is that groups of runners may have been looking at the base of the building at the same time, and when one of them said "it's not here", they all agreed and ran on. Hence lots of DSQs!

[Dave]

exactly. solution to the problem - dont talk to or take advice from your competitors whilst racing (unless one of them gets a tree stuck thorugh their thigh)

[Snail]

I wasn't there, so not sure whether the RouteGadget map is identical to the competition map, nor have I seen the full control description, but the Routegadget circle appears to indicate how some confusion arose.

It looks to be very close to the junction of two walls - one roughly NW-SE, and one roughly SW-NE (but actually perhaps closer to a bearing of 30-40 degrees. And it even looks to be centred on the south side of the wall corner.

In relation to the first wall, I agree "NE side" is unambiguous, but in relation to the second wall it isn't. Irrespective of whether the control was hung precisely at the corner or a (very) short way along the wall, either "Inside corner" or "N side" would appear to be less ambiguous descriptions.

[graeme]

It is misleading in the sense that people got misled.

The question is whether that's a good thing "Ha ha look at all those idiots getting confused by IOF descriptions, that showed 'em ", or a bad thing "Orienteering is about mapreading, not knowing the geeky minutiae ".

We all enjoy correctly interpreting a complicated bit of map, but I've never met anyone who got pleasure from interpreting a complicated control description. And I never met anyone who enjoyed getting DQed.

So I think its a bad thing.

[andy]

The question is whether that's a good thing "Ha ha look at all those idiots getting confused by IOF descriptions, that showed 'em ", or a bad thing "Orienteering is about mapreading, not knowing the geeky minutiae ".

We all enjoy correctly interpreting a complicated bit of map, but I've never met anyone who got pleasure from interpreting a complicated control description.

It's a good thing. I wouldn't say I necessarily get 'pleasure' from interpreting a difficult control description but I have had a sense of satisfaction from it where it has saved me time. As long as the description is accurate and unambiguous anyway.

There was an instance at the JK (08?) in surrey where, near the end of the courses, there was a 'building inside corner' or smilar, where you had to check the orientation to know whether to go to the North or the South of the building, if you mis-interpreted (or just assumed) then you got it wrong and were penalised accordingly. Surely any competent orienteer can check descriptions as well as the map?

Less haste / more speed

[MAPS]

I have had a sense of satisfaction from it where it has saved me time

I enjoyed the whole event. And I agree with andy, I get satisfaction from realising that it saved time and I didnt have any problems mis interpreting some of the control descriptions like others mentioned. The only problem I had was interpreting what some walls meant on the map, and although Im angry with myself about that it is also good because you just learn from your mistakes
So it is good

[EddieH]

Sean you can never have put a routegadget course on the net. It is a bit of an art and highly unlikely that you will get the control circles centred perfectly, so how it appears on RG is irrelevant.

I must say I don't see the problem - if you have a control on an uncrossable feature it is always necessary to check the description.

[Snail]

Eddie

I thought that might be the case, which is why I made it clear that I hadn't seen the competition map. In the absence of someone scanning that section of map, those of us who weren't there only have the Routegadget version to go on - and that looks slightly ambiguous.

If on the competition maps the circle was clearly centred on the NW-SE section of wall then I accept that "NE side" was unambiguous and perfectly fair.

(Snail, not Sean!)

[JennyJ]

I am the ultimate description-checker (beaten perhaps only by mairead?) and orientated my map to my descriptions and everything and still misunderstood it! My mistake though and I soon realised where it was.

In the JK example the overprinting was so far over on to the wrong building inside corner that people didn't feel they needed to check their descriptions which was why they were caught out (and also perhaps misled?)

[lilywhite]

And because of the chasing sprint format, my guess is that groups of runners may have been looking at the base of the building at the same time, and when one of them said "it's not here", they all agreed and ran on. Hence lots of DSQs!

And some of us got dsq-ed for listening to the people at the base of the building saying "it's not here" and thought they were talking about the control that actually was near the base of the building. Calamity.

[Spookster]

This is roughly what the map looked like. The red dot wasn't on the map, but it shows where the control was placed (as described in the control descriptions ).

As I approached from the south, I wasn't thinking clearly enough to understand what was meant by "NE side" for an L-shaped wall, but as soon as I saw it wasn't on the south side I went round to the north (top).