Nopesport League at Newark

[Glucosamine]

Headcam video here of course 2.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eoLTJo3NwMg

Good to re-live Sunday's competition and see another course being run (especially once I'd remembered where the x2 speed button lives). And interesting to see the 'tunnel' / service area route run from the (less obvious) opposite direction. Thankyou for posting.

I'm still not clear why the tunnel route through the building seemed to be shown as both canopy (grey screen) and tunnel (dotted edge). Though I can see that it does seem better to show route continuity (which is how I successfully interpreted it on the day) it seems to differ from how routes are shown e.g. on old Barbican maps (e.g. http://www.slow.routegadget.co.uk/rg2/#82 though that has the complication of multiple levels to try to represent) and seems to suggest two separate routes one above the other (or was this the case at Newark and I missed the other level?). ISSOM 518.1 says "a tunnel is an underpass or a tunnel is a passage running underneath the ground, especially a passage for pedestrians or vehicles, crossing under for instance a railroad or a road", whereas 526.2 says "A canopy is a building construction (with a roof), normally supported by pillars, poles or walls, such as passages, gangways, courts, bus stops, gas stations or garages".

ISSOM also seems to suggest using purple crossing point symbols in places where we don't always see them - one suspects that the resulting cluttered map might then be hard to read.

At the end of the day, if the cartography and course depiction are clear and do not confuse, then the spirit would seem to be honoured without worrying about angels orienteering on heads of pins. And I did enjoy the event!

[dustytoo]

Wasn't able to get to Newark, but judging by the comments and looking at the courses on Routegadget, I seem to have missed a good 'un.

Always interested in other people's mapping, I noticed that the Newark map seemed to show the boundaries and walls and fences inside the olive green. That seemed a little unusual. Just curious, but as urban maps are pretty detailed anyway, that seems to add more clutter for the eye to unravel. The positive comments about the courses here suggest that this did not add much of an extra burden to the route finding challenges. Is that the case?

[graeme]

Always interested in other people's mapping.

It doesn't help (and you shouldn't in ISSOM) have details like that which you can never legally see in the OOB, similarly building boundaries etc. etc. What's happened is the map is generated from digital data and the mapper didn't bother to take that off. At the same time there are substantial walls (2m+) beside roads which aren't mapped. Technically, this is not wrong, but it doesn't give as good an impression of the area as it could. The urban equivalent of drawing a line of equal height and calling it a contour. I'm sure its adequate for a Level C event, but it's not an excellent map. Contrast e.g. the JK sprint maps where the boundaries of OOB are properly mapped. Level A mapping vs Level C mapping?

[awk]

The positive comments about the courses here suggest that this did not add much of an extra burden to the route finding challenges. Is that the case?

Until you pointed out, I had not noticed, so, for me, that was the case, although I would have replaced 'much of' with 'any'!

I'm sure its adequate for a Level C event, but it's not a good map. Contrast e.g. the JK sprint maps where the boundaries of OOB are properly mapped. Level A mapping vs Level C mapping?

It may have not satisfied the precise technical requirements, but, I never noticed. The only, very minor, issue I had with the map was the portrayal of the hedges in the park north of the church - some were missing, which affected my route across the park. Other than that, I agree it wasn't good. It was excellent.

[Spookster]

I thought the map was very good, despite it not being quite to ISSOM standard. However, I couldn't work out what I could or couldn't do in the shopping centre, so I didn't risk trying. I still can't work it out now!

On course 2, could I have gone through the shopping centre from 8 to 9? And if so, then would I have been up a level or down a level?

http://www.noc-uk.org/gadget/rg2/index.php#114

[greywolf]

On course 2, could I have gone through the shopping centre from 8 to 9? And if so, then would I have been up a level or down a level?

Wasn't there, but I can't work it out from the map, or exactly what's going on with the canopy/purple hatching just to the south - is that a ramped road that you can't run under?
Also, I've never been to Newark but is it really so extraordinarily flat? there isn't a single 2m or 2.5m contour line on the map...

[andy]

I can't work it out from the map, or exactly what's going on with the canopy/purple hatching just to the south - is that a ramped road that you can't run under?

Looking at google earth/streetview you can get under the purple hatching, not sure what's happening level wise beyond that though!

[iainwp]

Given the comments here and the video there is a tunnel route under the shopping centre. I was confused (still too new to the game to fully understand the symbols on the map) and expected the canopy to indicate a passage through at ground level - so after some wandering up and down in front of all the shoppers, i came out of the East and and it cost me a minute or so. However, for a beginner like me it was a great course - just long and hot.

iain

[andy]

Aye, you can easily see how it works at around 19:30 onwards on the video: http://youtu.be/eoLTJo3NwMg?t=19m30s

[graeme]

By chance, I spoke to the controller today. It seems they agree with me, are aware of issues and regard the map as a work in progress. So if you enjoyed Newark, the bottom line is ...
... IT WILL BE EVEN BETTER NEXT TIME.

[Parkino]

I ran course 2. Kept me thinking all the way. No major complaints about the map, but I did tend to avoid areas I couldn't easily understand.

For example, I wasn't sure what I'd find in the 'shopping centre' area between #8 and #9 - the map represents both canopy and underpass. Unless there are ways through on two levels, an underpass beneath a canopy, this can't be right. I was told later there was only an underpass so I guess the canopy symbol was used to make it more visible, but it was highly-misleading.

Also, single-storey car parks. Is 'paved area' really adequate? (See the OOB area north of #14 [55] and east of #12 [47], which I think were both single-storey car park.)

I'd prefer less overprinted OOB.