DJM makes reference to the map scale issue (1:7,500). In January this year Carol McNeill sent me this email: I am on a mission to promote the BO rules which allow larger scale maps (1:7,500) for older competitors and if you have not already considered this for the British Champs then with due respect I would like to point out that this is possible within the rules (detail provided). We did decide to print at this scale for Balmoral and the Relays at Torphantrick for M/W 70 but of course at Balmoral other younger competitors sharing courses also had 1:7,500.
So when and how should we apply this allowance for 1:7,500? I was given the impression that at Balmoral 1:10,000, even laser printed, would have been fine for all. If anyone knows any old people who look at Nopesport (apart from myself) can they canvas their opinion? What is old, who decides if an area should be at the larger scale etc?
1:7500 for older competitors
Moderators: [nope] cartel, team nopesport
18 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
1:7500 for older competitors
Fac et Spera. Views expressed are not necessarily those of the Scottish 6 Days Assistant Coordinator
-
Freefall - addict
- Posts: 1206
- Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:08 pm
- Location: Scotland
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
WMOC manual wrote:The map scale for Middle and Long distance races shall be 1:10000 or 1:7500. NB The map shall be surveyed as if it were 1:15000 nevertheless (ISOM 2017).
The Organiser and SEA will decide what scales will be used for each age class.
Recent precedent suggests that using 1:7500 for M/W60+ works well, keeping 1:10000 for the younger classes. For uniformity, it would be best that each age class uses the same scale for each of the three “forest” races.
The IOF are grappling with this issue too and there has been a lot of pressure, particularly from Scandinavia, to have enlarged scales for older classes. I gather that it's now pretty standard in Sweden that 1:7500 is given to these classes and this has driven the change to the WMOC manual for 2018 quoted above.
My thoughts are that the balance is in danger of shifting too far in the 1:7500 direction and, whilst I would be comfortable with 1:7500 maps for highly complex contour areas, it would seem silly to me to have to supply this scale for, say, a typical New Forest map where 1:15000 might still work well for older eyes!
- DJM
- diehard
- Posts: 981
- Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2007 8:19 pm
- Location: Wye Valley
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
It's a judgement call for which there is no simple equation. I think the best people to make the decision are the planner and mapper, based on the complexity of the area and the level of detail mapped, with support / approval of the Controller, but even this can give a split decision. At Ainsdale last year, as planner I concluded that 1:7,500 would be best for all courses (incl. M/W 21). The controller was happy to support this, but the mapper said that had he been controller he would have insisted on 1:10,000 for the longer courses. I took a straw poll of some M21s at the finish. Most approved of having 1:7,500, a few had no strong opinion, none said they should definitely have had 1:10,000.
Conversely I am still happy with 1:10,000 on many areas and even 1:15,000 on some.
(1st year M60)
Conversely I am still happy with 1:10,000 on many areas and even 1:15,000 on some.
(1st year M60)
curro ergo sum
-
King Penguin - addict
- Posts: 1453
- Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 6:56 pm
- Location: Kendal
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
(M67) I found the 1:10000 at Braunton Burrows very difficult to read inside the circle. I found the 1:7500 the day after to be very possible. I found Balmoral at 1:7500 also very possible. I think it is a sensible approach to failing faculties.
- Sloop
- red
- Posts: 157
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2006 10:50 pm
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
King Penguin wrote:... I think the best people to make the decision are the planner and mapper, based on the complexity of the area and the level of detail mapped, with support / approval of the Controller, but even this can give a split decision. ...
Except that most M/W21-35s won't appreciate the issue of aging eyes - so mapper / planner/ controller might all agree that the 1:15 map is absolutely fine for everyone!
- Snail
- diehard
- Posts: 709
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 8:37 pm
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
Freefall wrote:... with due respect I would like to point out that this is possible within the rules (detail provided).
The detail is in Appendix 4. It allows the use of a larger scale only ...
"if the Planner and Controller of the event agree that the map at the smaller scale is too difficult for competitors in the relevant class to read while running."
Leaving aside the implausibility of getting two orienteering to agree about map scales, it means that the mapper must have failed to do their job properly, and the club/organiser must admit to being too weak-willed to go back and tell them so.
This has given us some heartache at the 2018 middle champs. Stock Hill has been mapped perfectly well at 1:15000 in the past. Comparing that map with the last version is a excellent example of how overmapping leads to clutter. We sent the mapper (Dave Peel) out with a strong steer to make it legible at 1:15000. It was made clear to Dave that if we weren't happy, we'd send him back again. We* are very happy with the outcome. Using ISOM2017, with thinner formlines, helps a lot.
So the rules don't let us 1:7500.
On the other hand, I'm not one to let the rules get in the way of what I want to do. Stockhill is small area and I can see no advantages to using a smaller scale. It turns out the rules still say the map should be ISOM2000 - they haven't been updated. So our lovely, legible new map is noncompliant anyway, we'll have to ask for a variation and we'll sneak through a 1:7500 proviso at the same time.
* "We" here includes planner, controller and our M75 map advisor.
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4728
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
Stock Hill has been mapped perfectly well at 1:15000 in the past. Comparing that map with the last version is a excellent example of how overmapping leads to clutter
Sounds like we will be seeing a lot of small brown dots [117, broken ground] in September.
- Parkino
- red
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2012 9:37 am
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
We'll say more in the details about that, but yes there are small dots. They work extremely well in this leadmining terrain, because typically you have a mined strip running gently downhill which is full of pits at the bottom. If you map all the pits, it completely obscures the contours.
Dave shows the main features and shape with contours, and the full extent and direction of the diggings with dots. So the small dots are not just saying "we didn't map the pits", they show you a linear feature which you can use to navigate by.
Dave shows the main features and shape with contours, and the full extent and direction of the diggings with dots. So the small dots are not just saying "we didn't map the pits", they show you a linear feature which you can use to navigate by.
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4728
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
I don’t really mind about the map scale and even level of detail on the map.
However, I DO mind about the planning philosophy that normally follows a bigger scale, more detailed map. Which is to use every single bit of “detail” for a control site, and you end up with a control pick course of 30+ controls.
So please graeme and friends, can we not fall into that trap once again. Even the longest middle course should not have any more than 20-25 controls.
However, I DO mind about the planning philosophy that normally follows a bigger scale, more detailed map. Which is to use every single bit of “detail” for a control site, and you end up with a control pick course of 30+ controls.
So please graeme and friends, can we not fall into that trap once again. Even the longest middle course should not have any more than 20-25 controls.
- Arnold
- diehard
- Posts: 739
- Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 10:24 am
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
Arnold wrote:
However, I DO mind about the planning philosophy that normally follows a bigger scale, more detailed map. Which is to use every single bit of “detail” for a control site, and you end up with a control pick course of 30+ controls.
So please graeme and friends ..........
I don't think you'll ever get this from graeme: to quote him from an earlier thread:
'Between the planner, two controllers, one technical advisor and three IOF event advisors for the WOC middle, the concept of "middle style planning" was mentioned precisely never. About the only thing we all agreed on was that we should plan the best possible televisable course with a 34min winning time.
At Livingston yesterday, several kind M21Es and W65s said their course was exactly what they wanted. It was the same course.'
- Gnitworp
- addict
- Posts: 1093
- Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2006 1:20 am
- drobin
- light green
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:49 pm
- Location: Boringstoke
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
I should mention that looking at my 1:15000 of Stock Hill, I had no trouble reading it in 1989 as an M35. Today I would prefer it as a 1:10000.
1:7500
1:7500
- drobin
- light green
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:49 pm
- Location: Boringstoke
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
Thanks for that Jim
However, you'll also find I have a strong opinion that the planning style is the responsibility of the planner. So when you enjoy your courses at Stock Hill, as I hope you will, Ben Chesters is the man to thank. If there's a control in the wrong place, you can blame me.
However, you'll also find I have a strong opinion that the planning style is the responsibility of the planner. So when you enjoy your courses at Stock Hill, as I hope you will, Ben Chesters is the man to thank. If there's a control in the wrong place, you can blame me.
WOC2024 Edinburgh
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
Test races at SprintScotland (Alloa/Falkirk) and Euromeeting (near Stirling).
-
graeme - god
- Posts: 4728
- Joined: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:04 pm
- Location: struggling with an pɹɐɔ ʇıɯǝ
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
drobin wrote:I should mention that looking at my 1:15000 of Stock Hill, I had no trouble reading it in 1989 as an M35. Today I would prefer it as a 1:10000.
1:7500
Taking a look at this map for the first time, I am intrigued by the apparent detail shown by the very wriggly contour lines on the hills. Surely these wriggles are of no value to an orienteer and, whatever the scale, they should have been smoothed when producing the map.
As another point of interest, are there really no pits/depressions in the walk/fight areas apart from two in a clearing near the middle?
On the question of scale, with so many pits marked on this 1:7500 map I suspect it is not a true navigational challenge and instead more luck when you hit the correct pit - probably aided by another competitor leaving it as you arrive nearby. I would support more use of the broken ground symbol which would then probably make 1:10000 suitable. I will though trust the judgement of those with the responsibility for the event and recognise that this will have been debated at length.
- DavidJ
- light green
- Posts: 289
- Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 10:37 pm
- Location: Berkshire, UK
Re: 1:7500 for older competitors
Comparing the 2016 1:7500 with the 1984 1:10000 map, the most striking thing is that the ridge at the bottom of the map has grown in height by 7.5m in 32 years. Are the Mendips known for their seismic activity?
- Tim
- yellow
- Posts: 96
- Joined: Mon Apr 16, 2012 11:32 pm
18 posts
• Page 1 of 2 • 1, 2
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 27 guests