British

[distracted]

Graeme -> interestingly in that same document that you reference, in the Map Awards section:

Professional Map to The Map Works for Pwll Du

Yes there were good aspects to the British, and from an organisational point of view things seemed to work very well. However it has shown again that there is something going wrong with the quality-control aspect of the sport, which needs to be rapidly addressed. Points that I could raise just from the weekend:
- Who is a map advisor? What is their role in map production? How much input are they expected to have?
- What are the fundamental roles of the controller?
- How often should controllers be reviewed/assessed?
- Should there be an assistant controller at major events - another person to notice things?
- Should there be an accepted minimum quality for printing? (I'm quite amazed as to the difference in clarity even between the 1:15 offset map and the 1:10 laser print).

One of the things that at least often gave an explanation of something which might not have worked as expected, but are becoming less and less common after events, are the organisers/planners/controllers comments. I'd be willing to bet that the majority of the quality control problems that occur at orienteering events have been covered in these comments in the past. However, they still have not been learnt from. How much effort would it take for someone to collate the salient points from these comments and distribute, say an annual bulletin of sorts, to every controller in the country? This would at least advise of recent problems, common errors would come to light and there should at least be some increased awareness.

One note of warning - there are still sets of comments which show that officials can be full of self-praise even when things have gone wrong...

[EddieH]

Having finally got back north, the first thing I would lke to do is thank the team for putting the event on at such short notice.

The 2 discussion points I wanted to talk about have both been well covered by others. (map scales and removing legs vs voiding).

Both these problems seem to to be largely one of the rules, not (particularly the first) the fault of the organisers.

Briefly:

1 1:10000 was introduced to have enlarged maps for older eyes. This map was DEFINITELY NOT appropriate for older eyes. To shrink it to 1:15000 is ABSURD - the rule that makes that happen is an ass. Realism says tha map exists and no-one is going to pay to go out and totally remap it at 1:15000 spec (the ideal).

2 Voided courses leave everyone totally dissatisfied (hence the rule about only if major places are materially effected). EP gies us the possibility of a patch which whilst not ideal has to leave more people satisfied. In this case with a W21E victory by such a large margin voiding would have been absurd even though the rules say it should have happened.

[Nails]

Eddie there isn't actually a rule that says that 1:15000 needs to be used -except IOF rules for Long distance World Ranking Event's.

Since it wasn't a WRE it's actually even more ABSURD that it was used. Sounds like it was a plea/suggestion from Elite Comps Steering Group -who in my opinion should have taken one look at the map and said "unless you are going to remap this at 1:15000 (which is what we would prefer) then you'll have to print it at 1:10000" -simple answer really!

[EddieH]

Absolutely Nails I agree utterly. Maybe not the rules at fault, but the directions give to the organiers.

[tendon]

I think Appendix H, 1.4 indicates that, for Level 1 events, the map should be at 1:15,000 and that permission (from the map group) is required to deviate from this. It goes on to detail the survey scale, explicitly covering the issue of over-mapping.

Unless specifically approved otherwise therefore, a Level 1 map must be 1:15,000 and has to be mapped to achieve this.

I believe the IOF regulation excludes the possibility of alternative scales to 1:15,000 for long races.

There is no requirement for elite competitions group to assess the map prior to printing.

[wonderboy]

Not really saying anything new but I found the 15,000 maps of Penhale and Pwll Du very difficult to read on the run.

I presumed we had to have 15,000 for elite long but now I find out it's just for WRE's then I'm even more annoyed.

I'm afraid you need a map done at 15,000 not a shrunk 10,000; so some of the detail is not mapped at that scale but it at least makes it navigable at speed.

Many times on Saturday, I got into the circle and hunted because you could not read the detail sufficiently clearly to be able to navigate to controls from the map.

So I'm in total agreement with Nails and Graeme on this one.

A separate point; was it necessary to use the Blorenge at all? What was wrong with the western end of Pwll Du which seemed unused on the other courses I saw?

Also M21E controls 4, 15, and 22 (all crags) seemed a little strange. anyone else agree?

I also agree with the huge variation in runnability whilst all mapped as rough open, but don't see an easy solution to this one.

I always enjoy the British Champs as the event alone carries status and atmosphere, but I felt more than ever this year that attendances were low across all classes (especially Elite) and am thinking if people aren't coming to the British then the sport really is in more trouble than I thought. Perhaps I'm being too pessimistic.

I'd like to add that as a holiday weekend event it was very pleasant and the +'s outweighed the map scale -'s.

[Nails]

4 placed on crag above (10m out). 22 description was wrong because in actual fact the crag continued to SE so SE foot was rediculous. Sorry can't remember 7.

[FatBoy]

Are you saying 4 was in the wrong place (same 4 on M21L)? I was above it as it looks a fair way up from the bottom on the map, but the control was very near the bottom of the re-entrant. Something was certainly weird although possibly it was me

[Nails]

sorry i mean it was actually on the lower mapped crag -not the upper one.

[graeme]

Yes, #4 was slightly wrong (like I said yesterday).

But the flag was visible from the right crag (which shouldn't have appeared at all on a 1:15 map ). Probably cost 4-5 seconds, we can live with that.

[FatBoy]

Sorry Graeme - I read your point about the crag but didn't make the correlation in my head with number 4. It may have been visible from the correct crag, but I knew I was at (about) the correct height and came across a small crag which I assumed was unmapped, carried on at the same height until I had gone too far, swung around to start looking and there it was lower down. Time cost more like 90 seconds contouring on such slippy slopes. I suspect you came over the top to it, thus meaning the flag was in your line of vision. I agree it shouldn't have been mapped (even at 1:10), but I can't agree this wasn't a problem. Maybe we don't all get close to the centre of the circle and start looking around us!

I agree with your recent post re mapping scales 100% though.

[Tatty]

One of the reasons for the low attendance was the fact that many Uni students had exams. There weren't any Men from EUOPC, and only 2 women, one of whom is a Post Grad and therefore not involved in exams. My son had a 9am exam on Monday morning, not really a possibilty with the Rekays not finishing until 2pm with a 400 mile drive back. Some people were probably put off by having to travel back to a similar part of the country to the JK. I believe that WOA always intended to have BOC and it was the JK that was changed due to another region dropping out and SWOA?SCOA/BAOC under the guidance of Mike Forrest stepping in. As many people as normal went to the JK. It's a shame that more weren't able to get to BOC.

[awk]

Culbin is just as detailed as Penhale or Pwll Du - I don't know what the plans are but with a new area and professional mapper as coordinator I'm confident we'll get a map properly surveyed for use at 1:15000, just like we're supposed to. And if I still need a magnifier, as is likely, that will be my problem.

Out of interest, the WOC76 Relay map was at 1:15k (the individual was at 1:20k). Comparing to the 2001 Culbin West map, it all seems there, and looks clear. For the Six Day, Culbin is at 1:10k/1:7.5k. Should make an interesting comparison.

[T5]

Nails - by spending more time than you actually charged for the Scarborough map your attitude is commendable. However, you may have unfortunately perpetuated the myth that you can get a good map for a cheap price.

When people realise the true cost of (good) mapping, perhaps they will be prepared to spend it. If you didn't know it was going to take so long until you got stuck into it, I think you should be allowed to go back to them and ask for more funding as soon as it becomes apparent. How is it fair to hold you to a fixed price when they didn't foresee the complexity either? If they did foresee it, but thought - "ha, we've got a cheap price for that", then they should expect a cheap result.

As for an earlier comment about saving £5 to get a "reasonable product" - it seems to be false economy - like buying a car at a knock-down price, only to find it turns up with 4 bald tyres

[redpossum]

On the subject of mapping time, a valuable source of information is Robin Harvey's book 'Mapmaking for Orienteers'. Robin gives the following recommended minimum times that should be allowed:

Good base map, open land – 18 hrs per sq km
Good base map, forest with average detail – 36 hrs per sq km
Good base map, forest with complex contours and/ or vegetation – 54 hrs per sq km

These figures are based on an experienced mapper's capabilities. A poor base map can easily double the times.

Urban mapping again depends on the base map and it would seem to be money well spent buying OS 1:1250 or 1:2500 data. DXF files would cost more but save a lot of digitising time.

It is worth bearing these figures in mind when commissioning professional mapping.