Mandatory crossing points

[tim sleepless]

You don't need to defend yourself at all, as many people have said, they were great courses.

[stodge]

Tendon,
I think I had a word with you whilst you were stood at the path end next to the road, to ask where the OOBs ended ( Half walking round I had lots of time to poor over the map )and you indicated into the forest.
I hadn’t seen any final details as I was a late call in to a team (ie that morning) However I also didn’t see the map correction either...

My scruples probably would have kept me in the forest anyway as I would have been unsure as whether the verge was OOBs but hey I'm not exactly competitive. However It would have been much quicker to run down the verge, let alone the metalled surface.

Id say for the future tape the OOBs and disqualify anybody then going under it.

There are some crosses marked further down the road, what is the significance of these ?

All in all very good planning and I had a great time thank you.

[stodge]

just read your post about getting someone else to do it, please don't give in, planners as good as you dont come along that often and knowing the controllers I know what you lot have had to put with and the constraints involved. There will always be someone who has a gripe, listen to good comments and remember people only comment when things are very good or very bad, I think you know the BOC relays fall into the very good category

[tendon]

However It would have been much quicker to run down the verge, let alone the metalled surface.

Verge stopped at a large tree after about 20 metres, then continued for a bit, then stopped ... Eventually, it got quite wide (about where the red line starts to run on the road edge itself)

There are some crosses marked further down the road, what is the significance of these

The road was orignially marked OOB by crosses throughout. It was felt that replacement with the hatching reinforced the message and extended the area to cover the road edge as well as surface

[Gnitworp]

Unfortunately this thread has become rather personalized obscuring the clarity of the issues. I said in a previous post that I thought the BRC courses were excellent - best I can remember - with the controversial leg potentially the best of the lot.

The purpose of originating the thead, however, was to deal with the issues in principle giving a recent example as an illustration.

I would probably have stimulated more objective discussion of the issues if I hadn't given a specific example; a tactical error?

By the way, how does the disqualification lobby propose to deal with offenders in non-relay events who are not wearing a number? Use physical force to detain them on the spot to ascertain their identity? Better to use appropriate benign planning strategies, surely.

[Gnitworp]

Two typos in my last posting: read 'personalized' for 'personal' in the first sentence, and add a question mark at the end of the second-to-last sentence.

[guest]

You have the facility to edit your own posts - just press the edit button on the right hand side of the post.

[Gnitworp]

Thanks Guest

(This should come after the next post)

[Gnitworp]

[quote="Gnitworp"]Thanks Guest

[Gnitworp]

I give up!

[mharky]

Tim, the relay courses were pure class.

[graeme]

First, the relay planning was excellent (format too fast/short for my tastes, but that's another issue).

Second, we seem to have lost track of the fact that not only was the road OOB in the BRC programme, but also very clearly marked OOB on the map. This is a perfect example of the planner "doing it right", and there really is no excuse for competitors deliberately being on the road.

[mat-d]

have to ditto mharky and graeme's comments about the planning... the courses really were great!!

Really enjoyed the relay run too! some of the best planning for a while.

Thanks all involved, and yes the planner was correct!

and to follow up from kitch's comment...dsq-ing people may be the only thing to do -- with marshalls placed in "high-risk" areas to stop people doing it. If yo do it, then face the concequences - in european events the penalties for cutting across OOB are like this and/or probably worse!

[Fratello de Pingu]

i also saw a large number of people running along an out of bounds road at the relays on sunday

[Guest88]

I ran down the OOB road on Day 1, and probably also on Day 2 although I can't find the map to check.

I didn't read the final details either day - I've never had the perception that it was critical to read the final details, and I normally don't get round to it. (Just being honest)

I didn't see any purple crosses on the road on either day.

Maybe the communication on the map could be more idiot-proof. Say, bigger purple crosses on the road. A big purple arrow pointing to the road and big purple text on an unused section of the map saying "OOB-DANGEROUS ROAD". I would be more likely to notice this.

Just a suggestion.

With the crossing points on Day 1, I did use these although I didn't know they were mandatory. Sometimes these are just marked for convenience, sometimes they are mandatory. If they are mandatory, then the most likely way of getting through to more oblivious people such as myself might be notices in the start box/instructions from official saying that you must use marked crossing points, risk losing the area etc...

BTW, I thought the course planning on both days was excellent and this isn't a criticism of the planner(s) on either day - just trying to analyse a way in which we might at events in general help communicate this sort of thing better and avoid the risk of losing land access etc... The answer might be to change the perception of people like me that we can get away without reading final details.