Control Description Reading Contests

[Gnitworp]

We had 5 'middle reentrants'. Since there were a large number of reentrants in each of the circles, 'middle' was an inevitable qualifier as the control was at the centre of the circle, and all the other reentrants were less central. I would have known where the control was in each case without the 'middle' qualifier as my course overprint registration was perfect. If it hadn't been, I wouldn't have known which was the correct reentrant from the description

[Roger]

When does impassable vegetation become impassable?
.... if it was marked on the map as uncrossable...

Have a look at Friday's sprint map on the JK Routegadget. Among the buildings, and particularly in the SE part of the map, most of the green is the ISSOM 'may not be crossed' dark green, which was described in the event programme as 'green/black'. Contrast that with the thicket that forms the SE edge of the map, just above the PGL logo. That's the standard 100% green colour.

Now look at your printed map. On mine at least, the green amongst the buildings is the same as the green above the PGL logo: standard 'forest-type' thicket, which does not have the 'do not cross' implication.

To be fair, in the map legend 'impassable vegetation - forbidden to cross' appears as the standard 100% green rather than the intended green-black. And I know that the maps were delivered only very shortly before the race. But this looks like another pitfall to beware of, where everything looks fine on the planner's PC (and controller's print-out), but the printed map is not the same.

(Admission: I was caught by a different manifestation of exactly this issue when controlling a regional event last year. Some well-meaning colour tweaks by a conscientious printer caused some of the control description symbols to vanish from our well-checked OCAD file, and in my cursory check of the printed maps I didn't spot this.)

Sprint racing is different from what we're used to, and we're all still learning. In many ways, we can't always rely on our previous experience.

[MacMan]

It is with interest I read the reports.

For me the chance to control the event provided a number of challenges non more so than getting a good balance between setting courses that maximise the opportunities the land gave for route choice against “traps” as previously described.

Through-out the process over the last year I tried to use ISSOM2007 to help as a guide, and several paragraphs stand out (amongst many references within the document) …

There are a number of reasons why the cartographic representation of terrain for
sprint orienteering requires a different approach compared to that used for representation of ‘classical’
forested terrain. These include:

• Many more restrictions affecting route choice have to be considered in parks and urban terrains, such as physical barriers and areas with forbidden access.

The restrictions and constraints of sprint orienteering must be taken seriously by the organizers and
course planners. In particular:

• Both mapmaker and course planner should consider all possible route choices and make decisions on impassable features and out-of-bounds areas.
• The course planner should not encourage unfair actions from the competitors, such as crossing barriers or areas with forbidden access. If it is unavoidable to set legs that cross or skirt areas with forbidden access or impassable walls and fences, then they have to be marked in the terrain, and observers should be present at the critical points.

Maybe in hindsight, I didn’t get the balance right and possible at the determent of courses I could have requested David to tune down many of the traps – but actually it probably may have meant the area became unusable as it would be impossible to police every bush that was forbidden to cross, (there are 424 forbidden to cross areas or features) and as you can see from the photo from Monday morning runners had forced their way through both the bush and tape ! So we would need to police nearly everywhere – which with the volunteer effort needed we would not be able to do the event… so what’s the call .. .not use this area … surely that would be a loss to us all ? try and set a leg that didn’t in some way encourage you to go through an impassable area .. also tough (just look at the view of the area that is covered by forbidden to cross … it’s a challenge)

So sorry if you got caught out by the “traps” – I thought David set challenges that still remained fair in the context of the area, the description of the sites chosen and the excellent map.

[mike g]

I went to the wrong side of the building at 183 on the sprint course (17 on course 3) without looking at the control descriptions because I was sure, reading the map on the run, that the centre of the circle was to the south of the building corner. Looking at the map afterwards that is still my first impression, and though I accept it is mistaken, I believe that optical impression is created by the circle being broken on its northern side.

[Neil M40]

Can we have a change to the descriptions so that indented corner on the outside of something uses this less ambiguous and more intuitive symbol?

inside corner.GIF (1.68 KiB) Viewed 4999 times

[andy]

Can we have a change to the descriptions so that indented corner on the outside of something uses this less ambiguous and more intuitive symbol?

inside corner.GIF

i don't see what's wrong with the symbol as it is, without the circle you've added...

I used it at a sprint event in Edinburgh recently and didn't get any comments, and it was 100% clear to me on Friday what it meant.

[brooner]

Looks like pacman to me. I really don't see the problem with the symbol already used, it seems that people are now reading too much into the literal meanings of these.

[Neil M40]

Looks like pacman to me.

I was quite pleased with that aspect of it. It took me ages to draw it.

I really don't see the problem with the symbol already used, it seems that people are now reading too much into the literal meanings of these.

Ah I should have known you are not meant to interpret control descriptions literally. It literally means one thing, but you are supposed to just know that it really means something else. Probably by assessing the positivity/negativity of the feature involved, using the imaginary IOF feature positivity table.

Your statement is an admission that the existing symbol is ambiguous, however obvious you might think the true non-literal interpretation is. So why not have a new, non-ambiguous symbol?

[brooner]

ok, i probably shouldn't have phrased it like that... But looking at the attached I would say that, for the example of #2 on M21E, is pretty clear: "The edge of a feature (in this case the thicket) turns through an angle of 45-135 degrees; while the orientation of the symbol indicates the direction in which the corner points".

It doesn't however specify when it should be interpreted as inside or outside, but surely if its a solid, or supposedly impassable feature, which I'd say a thicket is (unless you're feeling brave), then the control is unlikely to be inside it (planner/controller dependent).

Is David Rosen still on the IOF rules commission? Perhaps he can take pacman to the next meeting

[Pippa]

I was one of the lazy people caught out by the third last control on the sprint race. I admit I really should know better.

Several factors contributed to my mistake. (1) I saw another runner heading for the wrong side of the wall whilst driving into the car park. (2) I always check sprint descriptions for sneaky controls sites, like inside/outside hedge corner, top/bottom of steps, and had registered this site was inside corner of building, but did not twig that the building could have two inside corners. (3) With the image of (1) in my mind I ran to where the centre of the circle seemed to be. Upon comparison afterwards I noticed that the circles on different maps were centred in different locations, with mine being towards the southern end of the selection. Maybe the broken circle contributed to this illusion. Is it possible that the circles were in different places, or was it my eyes? [Sadly, I do not have my race map as it was collected from me when I finished]

Anyway, lesson learnt.

I often have trouble visualising which side of a feature the control will be (I do not automatically know east from west, so use left and right), especially if I have my map orientated with the direction I'm running, thus necessitating some 2D thinking to determine which way is north, and hence which side the control will be. There's usually time in a middle/long race, but often not in a really complex sprint race, when it's hard to take in all the information on the descriptions on a <20 second leg. My favourite sprint this year was on a 1:1000 map, with 40+ controls in ~1km, and no control descriptions. The location of the control was given by a dot in the centre of the circle, so the challenge is pure navigation. No descriptions did also mean no control codes to verify you arrived at the correct control, a bit like micr-O then....

Pippa

[andy]

The location of the control was given by a dot in the centre of the circle

What an excellent idea for sprint races

[Neil M40]

It doesn't however specify when it should be interpreted as inside or outside, but surely if its a solid, or supposedly impassable feature, which I'd say a thicket is (unless you're feeling brave), then the control is unlikely to be inside it (planner/controller dependent).

True. And in future I won't have any trouble making that assessment, with regard to thickets. I feel stupid that I ever thought the control was going to be inside the thicket.

What if it is a copse? Inside or outside?

[Roger]

Now look at your printed map. On mine at least, the green amongst the buildings is the same as the green above the PGL logo: standard 'forest-type' thicket, which does not have the 'do not cross' implication.

Hmmm... under a different light, I can see a difference! And it's more obvious in the section of map immediately south of the spectator control, where the boundary thicket is closer to the hedges etc. Maybe this is an instance of the complexity of our colour perception -- influenced not only by the lighting, but what's surrounding the colour in question. (Green surrounded by black will appear lighter than the same green surrounded by white.)

My apologies for raising a red herring.

[Vidalos]

So for the sprint races would smaller control circles and or red dots in the centre of the control circle detract from, or add to, the overall event .

Would this help or hinder the competitor ?

[King Penguin]

The location of the control was given by a dot in the centre of the circle

What an excellent idea for sprint races

Been doing so for a couple of years on some of the HOC Winter Nights Street League events - e.w.t. usually close to 60 minutes.