Routegadget - Lyme Park

[Jon Brooke]

Why can't the person who crossed the wall own up to it? I'm sure many know who the person is.

Possibly the most stupid post on this thread to date.

Maybe they haven't read the thread?

Maybe they just have some sense of balance?

Maybe they're waiting for BOF to set up a truth and reconciliation commission?

[NickC]

May be they drew the line in Routegadget in the wrong place by accident?!

Thank you to all the people that put on the event.

[Fratello de Pingu]

Yes, Lizzi I thought they weren't allowed but someone seemed to suggest that they thought the dobs were allowed.
I also thought if your going to start huge arguments over one thing why not include everything that people did wrong at the event.
The event was fun as always. I don't know what everybody else thinks but I would have thought that it might have been possible to mark the crossing points with the course setting symbol thing. In some places I found it hard to find the crossing points on the walls/ fences.

[roadrunner]

Meanwhile, an ISSOM question. If you have a wall beside an olive green area, should you map it...

1. Crossable or uncrossable, according to height
2. Uncrossible, because you're not allowed on the other side
3. Not at all, because the olive green tells you you cant cross
4. Whichever makes the map clearer, because the olive green tells you you cant cross

Well, I'd say certainly not 3, because the map should reflect what the competitor will see and use for navigation, and he will certainly see the wall. Of the rest I'd go for 2, because that best describes the feature - uncrossable in ISSOM not necessarily meaning high.

Sprint maps aside, I think there's been a lot of confusion about what the "high fence/wall" symbols means; I've got some maps that describe them as "high" and others as "uncrossable" (and even the latter leaves it open whether it is forbidden to cross or just very difficult). Personally, I think that having a leg that goes across such a boundary, where it would be significantly faster not to use a marked crossing point if you could get over the barrier anywhere, is not really fair, for two reasons:

• It favours physical ability over orienteering skill
• It favours someone who happens to know what the fence/wall is like (i.e. who knows for sure whether it's physically crossable)

I notice that Aire used the "purple line" approach on the map of Attermire; this certainly (should) leave you in no doubt what can and can't be crossed, but on the downside, it completely obliterates the symbol, so if you're using the feature for navigation you don't know whether it's a wall or a fence. So I think that the ISSOM approach - uncrossable means not to be crossed, even if you can - is by far the fairest and clearest.

[PG]

Why can't the person who crossed the wall own up to it? I'm sure many know who the person is.

Maybe he didn't!!!

If anyone cares enough they can check my routegadget route (2nd on Medium).

I was crossing the wall on the south side of the wood. I ran up the wall, found a constructed gap which was well used by the public, went through and up the path on the other side. But then I joined the path on the map. The gap I used and the path the other side of it were not mapped.

I certainly should technically be disqualified as I did not use a crossing point marked on the map. I'm happy to give back my prize. But I did not risk damaging walls or put future events in jeopardy as I used an established crossing point, so maybe our apparent culprit didn't either.

[Lizi Beee]

ah but he did. the thing i don't understand is why then publicise it on routegadget and to draw attention to it - he added that he lost time on the jumping of the walls?!!?

[Ed]

maybe he was trying to disguise the fact that he'd simply programmed the splits into his stick sat in his car with a laptop and an SI unit?

[graeme]

...and when you saw him doing that you decided to post an illegal route on routegadget under his name.