BOC 2008 maps - Stupid Decision

[SJC]

If this decision is incorpororated into guidelines, Leith Hill will be the last championship event where vets and juniors will run at the same scale as elite.

I'm not sure that this is correct. Elite Middle races can be run on 1:10,000 maps, which would then be the same as for the M/W45+. So at Leith Hill they would have had the same scale. Not sure about the symbol sizes though, or what the M35 & M40 classes would get, as by the rules it should be 1:15,000.

Even more reason for sorting out this confusion.

[IanD]

I've just had a look at the minutes of the last Rules Group meeting, published on the Brit-O website today

Seizing the opportunity to say something positive about Brit-O, I feel the way minutes are now published on the web site is very good. (I look forwards to reading the AGM minutes).

Back to the point of this thread, some older members, myself included, are being fairly vocal about map scales/symbol thickness for our classes, and it looks like Rules Group at least are hearing the message.

Hitherto, older veteran classes and younger junior classes have both tended to have the same enlarged maps. So these juniors are also likely to be affected by any changes which may come out of this debate. Is this right for the juniors, who whatever other problems they may or may not have, surely do not suffer from "old eyes"? I have no view on this myself, I merely pose the question.

[awk]

So these juniors are also likely to be affected by any changes which may come out of this debate. Is this right for the juniors, who whatever other problems they may or may not have, surely do not suffer from "old eyes"? I have no view on this myself, I merely pose the question.

My M16 son much prefers the smaller scales, and is thoroughly dischuffed at unnecessarily running on the enlargements. I was the same as a younger competitor too, only starting to prefer enlargements when the standard scales became difficult to see.

[Ed]

If this decision is incorporated into guidelines, Leith Hill will be the last championship event where vets and juniors will run at the same scale as elite.

Not sure about that - on the JK day 1 (or day 2, or whatever it's called nowadays!), the Elite are actually running a different discipline to everyone else (Elite = middle, everyone else = long), for which a different map scale is specified (1:10,000 compared to 1:15,000).

It could be that 3 maps are needed for this day:
1. 1:15,000 map for non-elite classes
2. 1:10,000 map as enlargement of 1 for juniors and veterans
3. 1:10,000 map surveyed for 1:10,000 for the elite middle distance race

Persuading the mapper to produce two different maps of the same area may be tricky though...

[Brian Hughes]

These arguments show the complexity of the issue of map scales and also the urgency of sorting it out. Let us hope that the multiplicity of well-argued views voiced in this forum are considered when Rules group/Mapping Group meet.

To react to Ed's specific point: I would have thought that it would be totally impractical to provide 3 different maps for one event. If the elite can cope with 1:15 000 for a Classic distance race why cannot they use that scale for the Medium distance? Is 1:10 000 the recommended I.O.F scale for elite Middle distance races? Must the elite Middle distance race be part of JK? - I have no contact with the 'cutting edge' of the sport.

Brian Hughes (M60 HOC)

[DJM]

Brian,

It's easy to forget that a Middle race is not just a cut down (33% approx) Long race - Middle races are meant to have a different philosophy of planning from Long races. Appendix 6 of the IOF Competition Rules lays down the criteria for each discipline and summarises them as follows:

Middle: fast, accurate orienteering in technically complex terrain
Long: tests all orienteering techniques in physically tough terrain which allows significant route choice legs

Middle distance terrain should be consistently technically complex, hence the recommendationfor a 1:10000 map. Long distance planning should emphasise large-scale route choices rather than technical complexity and a 1:15000 scale is necessary as a result.
So, to answer your question - yes, the IOF does stipulate 1:10000 for Middle races (or sometimes 1:15000, but not for Leith Hill!)

[Brian Hughes]

Thanks for educating me, DJM. That is very clear and reasonable.

However, it does leave Ed's point unanswered. If it is accepted that 3 different maps for one area is impractical, how can we keep the Elites on a Medium race, the M35's on a Long, and the majority, we 'oldies', all happy simultaneously?

The obvious solution would be to go back to the Elite having 2 Long races at JK, but no doubt they would object to that?

Brian Hughes (M60 HOC)

[Adventure Racer]

The obvious solution would be to go back to the Elite having 2 Long races at JK, but no doubt they would object to that?

No - the obvious solution would be for everybody to have a Middle. <lights blue touchpaper and stands well back!>

[Ed]

Really it's only two maps needed - one surveyed at 1:15,000 (with a blow-up to 1:10,000) and one surveyed at 1:10,000.

In practice for many/most UK areas these will be the same map - only in very detailed terrain (e.g. the quarried bits of Leith Hill, sand dunes like BOC 2008 and the technical Lakes/Scots/Welsh areas) should/will they be mapped differently, and even in these cases then probably most of the map would be the same.

As for an obvious solution - how about giving everyone a middle distance race on one day at the JK?

[greywolf]

To me the JK Leith Hill 1:10000 map was a perfect illustration of an unreadable map in the detailed areas, for those of us with deteriorating eyesight. I constantly simply had to navigate to the centre of the circle, being unable to read the surrounding features.

You'll be very glad of 1:7500 at Culbin then I too struggled to decipher the map - but as Graeme says it was the green screen that made it particularly difficult.... And as the maps were up on the JKroutegadget beforehand we can't say weren't warned - I made a conscious decision to go really conservatively through the complex areas, made only about 3 minutes of mistakes (for me, a triumph!) and and then raced home

Middle: fast, accurate orienteering in technically complex terrain
Long: tests all orienteering techniques in physically tough terrain which allows significant route choice legs

Not in any way a criticism, because I really enjoyed the run, but from looking at Routegadget its not all that easy to pick out obvious differences between say course 3 and course 17 - there's just a couple more controls (but not in the most technical bit) and the winners are going a bit quicker!

[seabird]

but as Graeme says it was the green screen that made it particularly difficult....

Someone here raised the issue of possibly over-detailed mapping for the scale also contributing to the problems. Looking at the map during this lunch time I noticed one place where two parallel form lines are very close together with no separating contour, appearing to show a steep slope. (Unless my eyes still can't accurately sort out the brown detail displayed!) This was very close to one of the control sites I visited.

I think all we mappers have a real issue with the magnification we can acheive on the computer screen, and need to regularly check maps as we draw them to ensure detailed areas are legible to all levels of runner who might use them in competition.

[graeme]

Two parallel formlines dont usually show a steep slope.

You shouldn't have two parallel formlines, unless they're the same height around a ridge or valley. One example of this is in the map extract upthread, just SSW of the number 6.

EDIT: To clarify, I meant the example is of two parallel formlines, which are the same height around a valley! I haven't found seabird's "two formlines for a steep slope" yet...

I think the Leith Hill map is excellent, and the planners did well to avoid using the tiniest features. As it happens, I was OK with 1:10 + magnifying glass, though I accept my eyesight will be deteriorating for many years yet.

[Brian Hughes]

No - the obvious solution would be for everybody to have a Middle. <lights blue touchpaper and stands well back!>

Fair point, Adventure Racer, and may be the only practical compromise, but it would leave many of us more competitive 'oldies' distinctly unhappy. This season, I motored for 2.5 hours to get to a Regional Event, where the Long course took me only 37 minutes, and I was not the winner!
For me, value for money means running for around 75 minutes and I rarely get that these days orienteering. In other words, courses are aready too short. Introducing Middle Races for all at Major events like JK would make this worse.
Brian Hughes (M60 HOC)

[Gross]

This season, I motored for 2.5 hours to get to a Regional Event, where the Long course took me only 37 minutes, and I was not the winner!
For me, value for money means running for around 75 minutes and I rarely get that these days orienteering. In other words, courses are aready too short. Introducing Middle Races for all at Major events like JK would make this worse.
Brian Hughes (M60 HOC)

Better enter the HOC Long O then................ or start running marathons! That'll give you a good 100% + of the elite winners time at least... BTW... never managed to work out the time it would've taken you to complete (note.. not run!) the elite course!

[Adventure Racer]

Better enter the HOC Long O then................ or start running marathons! That'll give you a good 100% + of the elite winners time at least...

Wonderfully ironic comment given Brian's background - I actually very much doubt that would be the case even now he's an M60 if he put his mind to it (I wonder if that gives Brian a clue who I am)! ( - just reread Gross's post, and realised he didn't mean what I thought he meant)

We have of course been here and done this before - the problem isn't the inclusion of a middle for all on the JK, but that the long course at some events is far too short (the example given sounds about the right length for a middle!). I'm still not convinced that having a middle on one day, and then a proper long on the other (as opposed to 2 days of slightly shorter than long courses to account for it being a multiday) would significantly devalue the event even for those who like to spend as much time as possible in the woods - particularly given there's not much extra traveling time for the middle once you're there for the long anyway.