Control Descriptions in advance?

[Spookster]

Here in Lithuania ... there's plenty of helpers around to tape the descriptions onto your arm using clear packing tape... very few people use description holders.

Which I guess means that very few people in Lithuania have any arm hair left. Ouch!

[LostAgain]

I am surprised that Ray questions the value of separate control descriptions. Does anyone use the descriptions on the map when suitably sized description sheets are avialable beforehand?

I would agree with him that it is not a rule and therefore the lady arguing with the volunteers at registration is out of order.

Separate sheets are one of the positive advancements in the sport. As numerous people have already said stops you having to unfold your map and loose your position.

My preferance is for descriptions beforehand but accept which ever way is the same for all and fair.

[gross2007]

Which I guess means that very few people in Lithuania have any arm hair left. Ouch!

Surprisingly it's not that bad..... much less painful than taping your ankles

[Pingu]

I think the question wasn't so much about whether to give separate descriptions(which I along with the rest of you greatly support), more should they be given in advance or in the start lane? I personally amn't too bothered which.

[distracted]

i think, where possible i.e. where courses aren't gaffled, that there should be loose descriptions. it doesn't take much extra effort to produce/print them, it would be nice if they fitted in the holder sometimes though

as for when they are given out, surely it's a question of if there's any advantage to be gained by anyone? you might be able to guess a couple of control locations with them and an old map...

[Guest]

Agree with others I prefer loose descriptions. Also that the "fairest" way to handle these is to have them in the start lanes - particularly now that we generally don't collect maps at the finish prior to the last start - so perhaps that is what we should do for level 1-2 events.

For level 4-5 events I think just having them on the map can be sufficient. But to allow for relative novices / infrequent orienteers they should be written rather than pictorial - it certainly isn't "fair" if some competitors don't even understand the description, let alone which side of the feature it's on. This is what we do for our local (inc. schools) events.

To get a sensible transition between these, issuing loose pictorial descriptions in advance for level 3 events seems a sensible compromise. This gives those who are less familiar with pictorial descriptions the chance to translate them before going to the start.

[paddy]

for local events if the descriptions are on the map bring a pair of scissors if you dont like it, cut them off and put them onto your wrist.

[graeme]

Definitely prefer loose control descriptions. Folding, unfolding the map destroys control flow.

Regarding pictorials vs written. Nobody knows what a reentrant is anyway, and once you've used written descriptions in Finnish you'll realise why there are standards.

Burn heid,

Graeme

[Tatty]

General consensus is that people like/want loose descriptions. As for whether to have pictorial ones or not, in the past I was spoken to by the parent of a very young, under 10 , child, who said they understood the pictorial ones as they were obvious, but as the child was highly dyslexic they could not cope with written descriptions. Yet we always offer written ones for the youngest and White+ yellow. Are we getting it wrong?

[neil m37]

Pictorial descriptions are confusing where they don't match the relevant map symbol, a problem caused by using monochrome descriptions. If they are being printed on the map, there is no extra cost in using colour descriptions, so a knoll can be a brown dot and a boulder can be a black dot and I can stop getting them confused.

Loose descriptions would be more of a problem. And I still don't know why a gully is an upside down V.

[Adventure Racer]

Nobody knows what a reentrant is anyway

Good point - why don't we call this a valley, or some other more common term?

I agree with Neil - the pictorial descriptions aren't always intuitive, which is where I have a problem. I imagine the limited range of features on a white/yellow may well be more obvious.

Anyway, for me at least this thread (and also playing CF, or more particularly making maps / courses!) has inspired me to try and learn what all those symbols mean![/i]

[Spookster]

And I still don't know why a gully is an upside down V.

I guess a gulley is an upside down V for the same reason that a re-entrant is (kind of) an upside down U - it's a symbol that represents the contour shape. So a gulley is a "sharp re-entrant".

But don't ask me why a gulley is /\ rather than _/\_

[distracted]

Pictorial descriptions are confusing where they don't match the relevant map symbol, a problem caused by using monochrome descriptions. If they are being printed on the map, there is no extra cost in using colour descriptions, so a knoll can be a brown dot and a boulder can be a black dot and I can stop getting them confused.

On pictorial descriptions, a knoll is a solid dot and a boulder a solid triangle. There's no need for colour on the descriptions - all of the symbols are unique.

[Guest]

Pictorial descriptions are confusing where they don't match the relevant map symbol, a problem caused by using monochrome descriptions. If they are being printed on the map, there is no extra cost in using colour descriptions, so a knoll can be a brown dot and a boulder can be a black dot and I can stop getting them confused.

On pictorial descriptions, a knoll is a solid dot and a boulder a solid triangle. There's no need for colour on the descriptions - all of the symbols are unique.

I am aware that the symbols are all unique - my point was that because of the lack of colour they cannot be the same symbols as used on the map. A boulder on the map is a black dot - but a black dot on the descriptions is a knoll. It was only a suggestion (and probably not a very feasable one) that using the same symbols (& colours) as are used on the map would make them less confusing for beginners. In addition most maps include a legend, so you could look them up if necessary.

[Adventure Racer]

It was only a suggestion (and probably not a very feasable one) that using the same symbols (& colours) as are used on the map would make them less confusing for beginners.

But then a north pointing spur on the map is the same symbol as a re-entrant, and a west facing re-entrant on the map looks like a spur symbol