Consecutive codes and DSQ

[Adventure Racer]

OK this is an AR story not an orienteering one, but I did an event with exactly 36 controls (score event and I guess we weren't supposed to clear, but we did with an hour to spare!) Unfortunately at one control for some reason on leaving the control I wasn't sure if any of us had punched (gate and mapreading decision point, so got distracted) and we all repunched. Now it seems even a repunch in the same control uses up one of the spaces, so none of us registered the final control! Of course nowadays I have a V6 card, but my motivation is rather different to FatBoy's having previously been dq'ed not for punching the wrong control - I think I've only ever once or twice even punched an extra one - but for punching too fast.

Had an "old technology" problem at the NGOC New Year's Day score event this year. For some reason control codes were done in reverse order such that IIRC control 1 had code 250 and control 28 had code 223. This potential confusion issue was then compounded by the controls being marked on the map by old-fashioned handpunch, and that for 25 the ink had smudged and it looked like 26 - you'll have worked out by now that the control code was 226, so given I'd not checked any control codes up to that point (I hardly ever do in score events) it's obvious what box I punched!

[FatBoy]

On SI repunching the same control will not register in an extra memory slot if all of the following are true:

1) Nobody else has punched since

2) You haven't punched anywhere since

3) You repunch within about 10 seconds

[Adventure Racer]

In my story, neither 1 nor 3 apply (given there were 3 of us).

[sgb]

... apart from white and maybe yellow courses where you can have codes running sequentially as an assistance to the competitor. E.g. white codes rising in intervals of 5 (to allow some flexibility), and yellow with various intervals but always increasing.

Moot point. Some suggest that the white and yellow courses should be carefully planned using controls with random control numbers as there is otherwise a risk of ingraining a habit of not checking the codes!

And also that, furthermore, if a control substitution is made late in the planning, then kids are more likely to be thrown by one control being out of sequence than all controls having random numbers.

[IanD]

It's all very well saying that people should check codes, but some of us have less than perfect eyesight (even before our glasses have misted up ).

Therefore please make it as easy for us as possible, and where there is a risk of confusion (vaguely similar feature not a long way apart), please makes the codes as different as possible. My rule when planning is at least two digits different, and don't expect the competitor to be able to distinguish 6 and 8 (too similar) or 6 and 9 (may be reading the wrong way up).

Not saying I always succeed in sticking to this, but at least I think about it some of the time.

[Tatty]

I recall an event many, many years ago when 2 digit control numbers were the norm when had consecutively 16 61 19 91 !! Confusing to say the least. There were several DSQ's

[NeilC]

[quote="IanD"] My rule when planning is at least two digits different, and don't expect the competitor to be able to distinguish 6 and 8 (too similar) or 6 and 9 (may be reading the wrong way up). [quote]

Don't forget the BOF rule:
6.4.3 If the control code is positioned horizontally, letters or numbers that may be confused if read upside down shall be underlined.

Best to stick with displaying the numbers vertically.

[IanD]

Best to stick with displaying the numbers vertically.

Commonest now is an SI unit including a stake with the number displayed vertically. But even with that, the control hanger can put the kite so high that it obscures the number on the stake, so you read the number taped on the SI box itself, and that may be upside down - and I bet it's not underlined.

Not to mention the fact that you may be trying to read control descriptions off the map while running north to south. OK, you should know you've read it upside down and adjust accordingly, but when you can barely see the number while running anyway it's easy to make mistakes.

(I can see this debate coming back to haunt me when somebody finds two confusable codes near each other at the event I'm currently planning. Indeed, I now notice that 231 and 241 are both pits and only 100m apart. Oh well, too late to do anything about it now - I did try, honest!)

[Steve]

Whatever happened to letters for control codes - definitely a lot less confusable than numbers!

[HOCOLITE]

I suspect electronic software is designed for numeric systems as computers are numerically based

[SJC]

Whatever happened to letters for control codes - definitely a lot less confusable than numbers!

These are not allowed at international events due to the various different alphabets. I guess this has just filtered down into general practice in the UK.

[awk]

Whatever happened to letters for control codes - definitely a lot less confusable than numbers!

Like M and W, or D and O, or O and Q, or U and V, or Z and N (sideways), or G and C or.....

Of course, some of this depends on the way you write them, but my experience of letters as codes in the past is that they caused just as many problems). At least with numbers you are dealing with just 10 shapes.

[Adventure Racer]

I suggest binary codes - then you are only dealing with 2 shapes, and it's hard to confuse 0 and 1.

[Gross]

No need to suggest anything... just read the rules:

19.6 Each control shall be identified with a code number, which shall be fixed to the
control so that a competitor using the marking device can clearly read the code.
Numbers less than 31 may not be used. The figures shall be black on white, between
5 and 10 cm in height and have a line thickness of 5 to 10 mm. Horizontallydisplayed
codes shall be underlined if they could be misinterpreted by being read
upside down (e.g. 161).

[Steve]

I suggest binary codes - then you are only dealing with 2 shapes, and it's hard to confuse 0 and 1.

But which is msb / lsb?