Controller's responsibilities

[Ed]

Even transposing shouldn't be possible - check peg, see number, place marker, place SI unit. If a mistake is made (and it can be) the wrong placement will show up. Foolproof again?

at the last event I planned we split the hangers into teams of 2 - one put out the stakes, the other the boxes afterwards. in the two days before the event (the second of a two-day event), each control-hanger visited the sites where they would be putting the stake out. Any sites they didn't find the tape I then visited on the evening before the event, after they'd put the stake out, to check it was in the right place.

To ensure no transposing, the person putting the boxes out (morning of the event) had a course programmed in OEvent and punched each control as they placed it (in a specified order) followed by a download to check they'd put all the boxes out in the right order. On the morning of the event I then only had to visit the controls which hadn't been successfully punched (in all cases due to the forgetfulness of the hanger!)

I reckon that system was pretty foolproof, and avoids the controller or planner having to visit every control site (of course, you have to trust your hangers to some extent, but the doubling-up, punching and programmed courses means there's plenty of checks on them!)

[graeme]

I know we have BOF Rules etc but I think correctly they give guidance rather than mandate things such as checking controls on the day.

You dont think "correctly". The rules are rules - and you'll find the guidance in the section marked "guidelines". If you think your systems and people are good enough to ignore the rules, I wouldn't have a problem with that. If you're short of time/support there are always compromises to be made. But don't kid yourself you aren't breaking the rules, and if you're the controller and something is wrong, dont try to fob the blame off on the planner for something you havent checked.

Obviously, you dont need to check the control in place yourself, but you should have it hung and checked (i.e. visited twice). As controller I often hang some of the controls myself and get the planner to check: saves a bit of time. (and I don't think Gross is saying that controls don't need to be visited for checking on the day/previous day)

Graeme (controller since 1986)

[Gnitworp]

Although unlikely, with SI, it's still possible, of course, to transpose the stakes with the large code numbers and not the boxes. With EMIT, however, getting a placement sequence printout is theoretically foolproof because the control unit software is integral with the stake and pre-programmed.

[Ed]

Although unlikely, with SI, it's still possible, of course, to transpose the stakes with the large code numbers and not the boxes.

but when stakes and boxes are placed by two different people, part of the box-placers job is to check that the right stake is there...

personally (as a non-controller) I wouldn't think that the controller would need to personally check every control - it is the planners job to get the control in the right place, and the controllers job to ensure that that is done correctly. If a suitable system with enough checks and competent people is in place that doesn't involve the controller visiting all controls then they are still ensuring it is done correctly.

If the system breaks down then the controller (and planner) probably still gets it in the neck though!

off-topic, but kind of related, at a german national event earlier this year they managed to give on one day one course a completely wrong set of control descriptions. the course was voided, and all affected competitors will get free entry to a future event staged by that club. the mistake is thought to have arisen because too many 'experienced' people assumed the other 'experienced' people had done their job correctly and didn't double check. the more experienced people involved, the more need to check!

[Freefall]

Graeme

I wasn't suggesting breaking any BOF Rules - I agree they are sensible and practical. The reason I started the thread was that there are different interpretations as to how to actually apply the guidelines. Having read through various responses there is obviously no right or wrong way but there may be an ideal way (if circumstances permit). Unfortunately for a whole lot of reasons there can be circumstances that make checking difficult if not impossible so we have to look at the best way around to try and minimise the chance of mistakes.

As a Controller (or a Planner) I would be gutted if an event went wrong because we had somehow overlooked something that was avoidable. It is like Health & Safety - putting in the right checks and balances or a belt and braces approach. I still don't think one should mandate the controller visiting everything on the day/just before the event if they are confident that other actions can be used.

Colin Matheson AKA Freefall

[graeme]

I still don't think one should mandate the controller visiting everything on the day/just before the event

Colin,

We all agree on that! I can't see anywhere in the rules or this thread that the controller should personally visit every site. For events at a certain level a check (with sufficient time for a fix) in addition to the hanging of the control is in the rules. i.e. two people trusted by the controller to get it right.

Graeme

[Gross]

time. (and I don't think Gross is saying that controls don't need to be visited for checking on the day/previous day)

Graeme (controller since 1986)

Hope I wasn't saying that Wouldn't want to write anything that could be misinterperated to read the opposite of what I meant

Gross (Grade 1 & IOF & controller since 1975 ish)

[graeme]

Don't know if they were checked, but the controls all seemed to be in the right place, and it was all very enjoyable. As the controller said elsewhere, and most anticipated, courses were a bit too short (M21 winning time 57 by James Logue M35 instead of 67 by "a top elite").

Well done!

Graeme

[Freefall]

My assistant controller Dick Towler did check all the controls (actually went out with the planner to help carry stuff and then checked after the planner hung controls/put out boxes). It was a long tough day - done on the day before. On the day (Sunday) Dick checked the Junior courses on the farmland. The area was unlikely to suffer from vandalism and the control boxes were the type that woke up on first punch (1 sec delay for early runners).

I will write up a report on the planning etc but I am really pleased with the feedback from runners. Times were fast despite apparent length of courses. Probably better 10% faster for a multiday event.

Interesting to see some top runners (certainly from M14 and older) making some BIG errors. Relocation is difficult without line features.

There was an issue about a mispunch (SI didn't register it was said) but I will not make comment on this till I get feedback from other officials.

Colin Matheson

PS What was your time and which club is NWOC?

[Seamus]

NWOC is the North West OC from N. Ireland. They have top memebers of Allan Bogle and James Logue. you're probably thinking of James Logue who won M21L on Day 1 of the Lakes 5 day.

[EddieH]

I ALWAYS check all controls in situ, and it is rare that I do not move one or two a foot or two. However that aside I have not only come acreoss transposed numbers, but also in the British Elite champs a perfectly sited control with the corect box, but no flag! You just never know.

As a planner I have sometimes had controllers who take the attitude that they know less than me - thus I planned a badge event with the wrong code on the first control of M21L - mea culpa but it would not have happened if the controller had done his job. I had put the controls out a week before so as a retired man he had plenty of time.