I feel the need to belatedly vent my anger at a fellow competitor at the AIRE Malham event last Sunday...
An M65 runner (who I can easily identify from the results) knocked me over whilst overtaking me on a pathless section of tussock grass. He shouted 'sorry' over his shoulder and ran off, without stopping to see if I was ok or even looking back. If he had looked he'd have seen me crumpled in a heap, having fallen quite heavily. No harm done this time, but I could easily have been injured. And if I had been hurt, he'd probably have been out of earshot before I could have blown my whistle.
I was furious at the time. Although I'm sure the barge itself was accidental, it was completely avoidable - there was no need to get so close in the middle of a pathless moor. And running straight off is bang out of order. Sacrificing a few seconds to apologise properly and to check I was OK isn't too much to ask, is it? Some people need to get their priorities straight.
PS - thank you to AIRE for a marvellous weekend, as ever.
Malham
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Re: Malham
A completely different and totally unrelated point on the same Malham event....
Does anyone know why on the Blue course the red line from 8 to 9 was bent south rather than being straight and broken ?
Going back NW out of 8 and via 5 seemed a reasonable route on the map. I almost went that way, then remembered the comment in the final details re. how the red lines were broken or bent and concluded that for some reason the planner definitely wanted us to go via the southern road crossing. All I can think of is they didn't want competitors crossing the stiles in both directions.
Does anyone know why on the Blue course the red line from 8 to 9 was bent south rather than being straight and broken ?
Going back NW out of 8 and via 5 seemed a reasonable route on the map. I almost went that way, then remembered the comment in the final details re. how the red lines were broken or bent and concluded that for some reason the planner definitely wanted us to go via the southern road crossing. All I can think of is they didn't want competitors crossing the stiles in both directions.
curro ergo sum
-
King Penguin - addict
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 6:56 pm
- Location: Kendal
Re: Malham
Monika and I really enjoyed the Attermire/Malham weekend. Really good weather (last time we were there was in the snow at Kilnsey JK, not nice) and course planning is dictated by the area. Appreciate the effort involved in putting out all those stiles (although it looks like someone still wanted to run through a wall). Thanks to all involved for 2 enjoyable events.
- ianandmonika
- red
- Posts: 186
- Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 10:03 pm
Re: Malham
King Penguin wrote:A completely different and totally unrelated point on the same Malham event....
Does anyone know why on the Blue course the red line from 8 to 9 was bent south rather than being straight and broken ?
Going back NW out of 8 and via 5 seemed a reasonable route on the map. I almost went that way, then remembered the comment in the final details re. how the red lines were broken or bent and concluded that for some reason the planner definitely wanted us to go via the southern road crossing. All I can think of is they didn't want competitors crossing the stiles in both directions.
As Controller I probably need to hold up my hands here.
I asked Jack to bend the line. I did also suggest an extra control to make the southern option the only sensible route. This was because the alternative route (back past #5) would be a massive dog-leg and lead to people crossing the stiles in both directions.
As Ian says, planning in the Dales is dictated by the walls. Different Planners have different ideas about how best to deal with the issue. Jack was keen to have a number of long legs with multiple options of crossing points giving route choice. I'm not a great fan of this; it seams pretty similar to urban orienteering to me. However, as Controller, my role is try and ensure fairness rather than impose my planning philosophy on the Planner.
One of my main concerns was competitors getting stuck in a 'dead end' and being tempted to climb a wall rather than retracing their steps to the nearest crossing point. There were a couple of reports of damage to dry stone walls (thanks to those who reported it) but, on the whole, I'm pleased to say that it appears there was very little in the way of illegal wall crossing.
-
Homer - diehard
- Posts: 969
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:10 pm
- Location: Springfield
Re: Malham
Homer, were you aware the first leg on Short Brown was identical to that of Dales Weekend, Day One, 2013?
- Parkino
- red
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:37 am
Re: Malham
Parkino wrote:Homer, were you aware the first leg on Short Brown was identical to that of Dales Weekend, Day One, 2013?
No I wasn't. Different Planner, different Controller. Not sure it's something I should have checked for.
-
Homer - diehard
- Posts: 969
- Joined: Wed Apr 13, 2005 12:10 pm
- Location: Springfield
Re: Malham
Homer wrote:Parkino wrote:Homer, were you aware the first leg on Short Brown was identical to that of Dales Weekend, Day One, 2013?
No I wasn't. Different Planner, different Controller. Not sure it's something I should have checked for.
I certainly did short brown this year and think I did the same in 2013. Didn't notice it was the same leg. Obviously noticed it was the same start. It doesn't really matter as many doing this course 4 years ago will have changed age class and course.
- DM
- brown
- Posts: 577
- Joined: Fri Mar 17, 2006 2:47 pm
8 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests