Sheffield Urban Race - 3rd Sept

[AndyC]

I wasn't criticising Peter; more a note that as another planner and controller that we need to get as much black and yellow tape in our cars as we have red and white -just in case.
I'll have to have a word with the club equipment officer before my next officiating stint.

[cbg]

I saw no red tape but this shouldn't be needed when the map is very clear.

Compare with Roger's:

Subsequent careful study of the map with a magnifying glass suggests that I was wrong -- probably.

Urban maps are rarely 100% clear as one's eyes get older. Many of us, and I'm still a relative youngster (at least in my shaving mirror), take clear and obvious routes in order to avoid falling foul of mapping intricities. It's not such a problem in forest O.

[Fourth]

.

[Homer]

The splits make interesting reading.

Some amazing times for the leg between 221 and 208 (3 and 4 on the A course). It will certainly be interesting to see where these people went if they put their routes on routegadget....

[andypat]

You are right - its surprisingly obvious who is likely to have transgressed looking at the splits for that leg and the next one (which would be much faster from the point of transgression).

I wonder how hard it would be for the organiser/controller to contact most high profile of the possible culprits on the A course to discuss his route?

[LostAgain]

The splits make interesting reading.

Some amazing times for the leg between 221 and 208 (3 and 4 on the A course). It will certainly be interesting to see where these people went if they put their routes on routegadget....

Why put a control where you can clearly put your hand through an uncrossable obstacle and punch? Why not put it in the corner out of reach.

sub-50 seconds looks unlikely looking at the top of the field and their splits.
What shopuld be done?

[andypat]

I think they have explained that in the report on the SYO website - it was due to the length of the wire available to secure it.

This is at least the 3rd similar incident I am aware of in the last 12 months - one of these was at one of our smaller urban events. Speaking from personal experience these things are always a lot more obvious with hindsight (in our event the fence was one of those square metal grids around a basketball court. I couldnt get my hand through but kids could!)

Its probably something that should be publicised as much as possible pre-events as I am sure at least some of the transgressors arent aware this is not allowed.

[LostAgain]

Its probably something that should be publicised as much as possible pre-events as I am sure at least some of the transgressors arent aware this is not allowed.

I'm not sure that this is true. When I arrived, you could see the control through the fence, it was clear that it was uncrossable from the map and what you were supposed to do. Approximately 20 -30 seconds to go around and enter the area correctly.

[david_rosen]

We thought it was a great event on Saturday - well worth the trip (by train and tram) from Lancaster.

On the SYO website now, people are invited to disqualify themselves if they crossed the uncrossable fence on the leg 221 to 228 A (3-4) and B(8-9). I'm not sure that is reasonable.

Actually it was 208 not 228

As I ran along the N side of the fence/wall by 208 I could see that the SI box was (I thought deliberately) placed so that one could easily put one's arm through and punch.

"Forbidden to Cross" would generally mean one's body must not cross the barrier. It is at least debateable whether putting one's arm across a barrier is also forbidden.

I've often encountered controls in urban/park areas where the control has deliberately been placed just the 'wrong' side of an uncrossable fence in order to minimise the chance of vandalism, and where the only way to punch it is to lean across or reach through.

ISSOM specifies that the minimum width of impassable walls and fences must be 0.4 mm. I suspect that on the Gleadless Valley map, the impassible wall and fences are significantly less than 0.4 mm wide.

[seabird]

The issue is made more complicated by the control being moved during the event.

I only ran to the circle, rather than reading the description, so ended up going the longer route. Only to discover that the control was, not only the other side of an uncrossable wall and uncrossable hedge (both of which to my eyesight were clearly shown as such on the map), but also beyond my reach - that is if I had been mindful to transgress - which, of course, I was not

[IanD]

"Forbidden to Cross" would generally mean one's body must not cross the barrier. It is at least debateable whether putting one's arm across a barrier is also forbidden.

I've always understood that reaching through or over a "forbidden to cross" barrier was prohibited. Now that a lack of clarity in the rules has been highlighted by the Chair of IOF Rules Commission, is it too much to hope that the rules will be swiftly redrafted to be explicit?

[LostAgain]

"Forbidden to Cross" would generally mean one's body must not cross the barrier. It is at least debateable whether putting one's arm across a barrier is also forbidden.

Urban gets even more farcical if this interpretation is widely believed.

ISSOM specifies that the minimum width of impassable walls and fences must be 0.4 mm. I suspect that on the Gleadless Valley map, the impassible wall and fences are significantly less than 0.4 mm wide.

I could not say what the exact width is, below my measuring capability. But to me it looked mapped as an obvious uncrossable. It is certainly much thicker than any other fence on the map and to me unambiguous.

[andypat]

Its probably something that should be publicised as much as possible pre-events as I am sure at least some of the transgressors arent aware this is not allowed.

I'm not sure that this is true. When I arrived, you could see the control through the fence, it was clear that it was uncrossable from the map and what you were supposed to do. Approximately 20 -30 seconds to go around and enter the area correctly.

If it was that "clear" to you how come you arrived at the wrong side of the fence?

I think you need to take account of

a) Less venerable orienteers than yourself who may not yet have accumulated all the relevant rules in their brains
b)Newcomers to the sport of Orienteering (I brought one myself to the Lincoln event - he wouldnt have known not to do that)
c)Experienced orienteers trying urban for the first time.

[King Penguin]

When I got to 4 on A (wrong side, north, my fault) I though it had been deliberately placed to make it unreachable. I would have gone round anyway, but was pleased to see reaching over was clearly being discouraged. Maybe I got there after it had been moved ? I started about 11:45 I think.

[buzz]

Looking at the map carefully I think everyone who DIDN'T reach through the fence to punch 208 should be diqualified as its clearly in the Olive Green out of bounds.

Scrub that - just checked with the missus - she says its actually yellow not Olive Green

Seriously though any colourblind person would have spent half the event not knowing whether they were out of bounds or not.

I quite enjoy the extra challenge and am not too bothered about losing time getting route choices wrong, but I would be disappointed to be disqualified and even more so if I put pemissions at risk by inadvertently straying out of bounds.