Map Scales at 2014 BOF AGM

[awk]

I find it interesting that again an AGM proposal (like the largely unnecessary change to 4 levels) has come from NWOA.

You deem it unnecessary. NWOA proposed the change because they needed a system that suited their area and circumstances. In the meantime, does it not work for you?

I agree with DJM - and I support the views of ECC, a group of very experienced orienteers who are willing to listen to arguments before taking decisions.

Well, this argument has been going on for years. Nothing has been done until now, and only because of a lot of pressure. In the meantime, the ECC statement to the AGM is factually incorrect in its representation of the key element of the LOC proposal - good listening?

[Snail]

I can't read the map on the run as I used to - it's nothing to do with any trend to overmapping, more to do with an increasing older population who have grown up orienteering and expect to be able to continue running at speed, and want the tools to enable them (us) to do so

Don't disagree with wanting to read the map at speed, but I think it is to do with overmapping. If a map is corectly surveyed / drawn at 1:15000, and blown up to 1:10000 I can generally read it clearly. And the same for ISSOM maps surveyed for 1:5000, and blown up to 1:4000 or 1:3000.

It seems to me that the problem is that increasingly clubs are surveying and drawing base maps at 1:10000, putting on additional detail that this facilitates. It is then not surprising that 45+ age groups can't read this 1:10000 map and need it blown up to 1:7500.

The proposal doesn't appear to suggest that maps for the 45+ ages will always be blown up versions of the smaller scale - which is surely what most (older) people want - or in many cases need. Rather it seems to want complete flexibility to produce 1:10 or 1:7.5 maps - but if these are not blown up versions they will not necessarily be any more readable for older eyes than 1:15 versions.

[pete.owens]

That and the fact that we've largely moved from offset litho to laser printing. There is a difference, and it needs to be acknowledged, either by requiring the latter (which will have knock on effects in terms of entry dates, cost, time scales etc), or by acknowledging that larger scales can be used.

I think this is actually the main driving force behind demands for ever greater enlargements.

The last time there was a great fuss about scales at a top level event (when the northern championships were held at Graythwaite a few years back) the increase in scale merely compensated for the poorer quality of digital printing. I would hope that any planner requesting an exemption from standard scales on the grounds that the map detail was difficult to read would not simultaneously be requesting an exemption from the requirement to use offset litho printing.

[Derek A]

Although having nothing to do with the AGM proposal; my pleasure in orienteering has been extended by the increase in scale of maps available for me as an older competitor; I can read them whilst jogging round!
In the south Lakes; I do not believe that there is any evidence of over mapping; Bigland and Haverthwaite is still 'the same 1:15,000 map' produced in 1991 and I think Rusland and High Dam are the 1983 maps.

[graeme]

I couldn't read the '91 at the time, my eyesight always having been rubbish. Although there hasn't been a proper resurvey, things have been added and nothing taken off.

Also, that map is approximately tabloid paper in size. It would be four times larger, and totally unmanageable at 1:7500. So part of the map-scale issue becomes "would you like a tour of Bigland, or to run round in circles in one corner". The longer legs would be near impossible to read at 1:7500, so "would you like classic planning or middle-distance style". To both questions, my suspicion is that the first would be more appealing to newcomers and runners, the second to experienced technical orienteers.

[DJM]

awk wrote:

Firstly, the argument quoted is incorrect: control is NOT being given solely to organisers and planners. It is being given to the planner and controller IF they are in agreement.

Yes, this is an obvious mistake in the text of the E&CC statement. The thrust of their case remains the same however.

[DJM]

Blonde Bombshell wrote:

A club who have tried to discuss this matter with ECC, only to be rebuffed.

Surely the problem it that ECC have NOT been willing to listen to arguments.

A couple of points here. Firstly, I think that BB is referring to the Map Advisory Group here as E&CC have never been approached on this issue as far as I know.

Secondly, the suggestion that E&CC does not listen to arguments is demonstrably incorrect as, in their statement they say (my emboldening):

The Events and Competitions Committee (E&CC) has already given permission for map exceptions - the printing method for Day 4 Relays at JK 2014 and map scales at Days 2 and 3 of JK 2015

In addition, the E&CC want it known that anyone who contacts them about any matter will always get a response.

[Blonde bombshell]

Thank you DJM, I stand corrected. It was the map advisory group that caused the problem in the first place. Unfortunately, for an airhead like me (clues in the name), one committee is much like another. Faceless people from far away making decisions that greatly affect my enjoyment of orienteering.

I would prefer local experienced controllers, with first hand knowledge of an area to decide which scale to use.

Was there any feedback from competitors at the Stickle Pike event where different scales were available for all courses? Which maps sold out first?

[graeme]

would you like to run round in circles in one corner

Was there any feedback from competitors at the Stickle Pike event

The brown course crosses itself 14 times, while avoiding the faraway tricky NE and SW areas. Presumably this was to keep it on the large scale map? I would like to have enjoyed the whole area.

David isn't faceless!

[keever]

would you like to run round in circles in one corner

Was there any feedback from competitors at the Stickle Pike event

The brown course crosses itself 12 times

Seven

[RichT]

would you like to run round in circles in one corner

Was there any feedback from competitors at the Stickle Pike event

The brown course crosses itself 12 times, while avoiding the faraway tricky NE and SW areas. Presumably this was to keep it on the large scale map? I would like to have enjoyed the whole area.

Blue & Brown competitors were offered a choice of 1:15k, 1:10k or 1:7500, Green 1:10k or 1:7500 and White through Short Green at 1:7500.

I'm sure Hollie would be happy to receive any course planning feedback .

[NeilC]

The South East Sprint Championships is using 1:3000, and as event controller I am approving it because I think it is the best scale.

Is that for all competitors or just us oldies?
If the former what was the reason? Perhaps an area more complex than most other sprint areas? If so it should be great.

[Gnitworp]

It's for everyone and it fits comfortably on an A4 sheet and is very easy to read for all in 'sprint mode'

[graeme]

I'm sure Hollie would be happy to receive any course planning feedback .

I have vetted Hollie's courses in the past, and I have a high opinion of her planning and familiarity with her planning style. The course makes excellent use of a small part of the area, but it seems uncharacteristic of her not to use the whole area.
So I assume from your evasion that her planning options were indeed compromised by offering a 1:7500 map.

[Homer]

I'm really torn on this one. On one hand I like the idea of standardisation that ISOM brings, particularly when competing abroad. On the other, I like the 1:7,500 blow ups when competing at Level C and D events in the Lakes.

Perhaps it would help to know the details of the dispensation already given to JK 2015. Is it 1:7,500 offset litho printing for all M/W45+ on both days? If so, I think I'm happy with the status quo.

I agree with pete.owens that it's more to do with printing method than scale. I'd equate 1:7,500 laser printing with 1:10,000 offset litho in terms of readability. Clubs can use 1:7,500 blow ups with laser printing for their low key events if they want. The bigger events should be using offset litho and 1:10,000 should be OK if blown up from a map made at 1:15,000 and not surveyed for 1:10,000 in the first place.

I note competitors at the WOC selection races this weekend have a choice of scale because offset litho was deemed too expensive for the small number of maps. Perhaps the NWOA proposal is actually about saving money?