Sounds like a fairly typical FRA nav leg - I've never known one to be planned/mapped how an orienteer would. Still, you seemed to cope/run better than everyone else by some margin, keeping up your very impressive record at FRA's.
main points are that checkpoints should be in the right place, and it should be possible from the map to see where you are allowed to run - even fell runners should be able to manage that :P
Why don't they get an orienteer to sort this out every year?
because orienteers are weird magicians who want everything to be right and fair.
Where's the excitement without a few unknowns thrown into the mix?
I realised that our CP was the same as Leg4 CP1, and had been told that round the path was fastest to that so just did that.
The open access changing to pasture with green paths at the end resulted in me taking a sub-optimal route to the last CP - thankfully we managed to execute it quick enough so all those that went low stayed behind us - after driving a big train all day I wasn't up for finishing as the brake van!
I'd advocate lines linking controls, merely for the fact I tried to run it as a score course in 2011...
I always have the feeling that something's about to go wrong, and not because of my dubious nav! Last year's was pretty good (lack of RC withstanding) - controls in correct place, Harveys map. Only issue was following Birkenshaw at the point he went wrong!
FRA Nav leg: 50% fitness, 25% Nav, 25% luck.
Would it be good for orienteering recruitment to publicise in some way that we smash FRAs every year?
Most fell runners' view of navigation/need to navigate for safety on the hill is at the same time both hilarious and bloody frightening.
And absolutely no mention of any of the issues Graham mentions on the FRA forum thread, which perfectly illustrates ba-ba's point.
Actually, I think this was one of the better FRA relay nav' legs - some route choice, and whilst no great technical difficulty , it did at least reward those with some basic skills - e.g. ability to run in the right direction accurately - e.g. on A-B and B-C. Which is why it was such a shame that they didn't get all the controls in the right place or give us a map where you could see where you were allowed to go!
A wasn't the same as on Leg 1 - it was about 30m different! Stream junction instead of path/stream junction :P
It was the same as Leg4 CP1 though.
I may have accidentally volunteered myself to sort the Nav leg if/when Pennine organise an FRAs. So look forward to that...
Yeah I was thinking of leg 4 checkpoint 2 - subtly different by about 20-30m
From a pure navigational challenge point of view the more dodgy the map and course setting the better the good navigator will do because they will work out the maps is wrong and realise what is good and what is bad. The bad navigator will take the map for gospel. It's in adventure races where you really see this in parts of the world where there just are not good maps.
I have directed the organising committee for next years race to this thread if there are any extra useful points you'd like to bring up
Yeah have spoken quite a lot with Mark Johnson about it already.
Is it in Scotland again? Might get the Haries out to try for that medal that's so far eluded us.
Ha, they could even use an ORIENTEERING MAP!!!!
not that most of them would notice what kind of map it was, they're all pretty much the same once you stick them in your bum bag
Cool. Hope it's not same weekend as CS Trophy!