Register | Login
Attackpoint - performance and training tools for orienteering athletes

Discussion: 1:15 000

in: Shep; Shep > 2016-10-01

Oct 5, 2016 11:30 PM # 
'Cos of IOF rules, innit? We've had 1:15 000 for long races on Cascades before but I guess that was about 15 years ago! (I saw a test print at 1:15 000 for this event and said it should be manageable as long as the control sites were on legible features, but I never saw the final courses).

As for using GPS, my personal opinion is that it's fine if it's taped over...
Oct 6, 2016 2:28 AM # 
Was there anyone in the race who actually wanted to run on 1:15000? There certainly was not a majority, so why are we following a rule that most people don't want?

Isn't there an allowance in that rule for exceptions? I thought oa was able to get iof approval to run long races on a 1:10000 map if the terrain is sufficiently complex. If the Cascades isn't then I'd love to see a map that is!
Oct 6, 2016 7:09 AM # 
Uncle JiM:
NZ held a race once, where they asked participants what scale would they like, 15 or 10, as both options would be available on the start line. Some PPL still took the 15
Oct 6, 2016 9:37 AM # 
good one!
Oct 6, 2016 11:01 AM # 
Yeah nah, IOF doesn't give any option. I get the impression they're tightening up on stuff like that (after all, they don't really trust* any countries outside Scandinavia to do things 'properly').

*their trust may be misplaced
Oct 6, 2016 12:41 PM # 
yeah answered my own question

"15.2 The map scale for Long distance races shall be 1:15000. The map scale for Middle distance races and for Relays shall be 1:15000 or 1:10000. The map scale for Sprint (including Sprint Relays) shall be 1:5000 or 1:4000."

tightening up and keeping it traditional. like keeping the number of non-europeans at woc down like it was in the good old days.

they give us 1 spot at woc (in the mens anyway) and we protest by doing every stupid thing they say with a smile. awesome oa.
Oct 6, 2016 7:35 PM # 
US events have a built-in clause where they can ask for an exception, but not if they are WRE's - then the IOF controller has to enforce 1:15000. Was this a WRE?
Oct 6, 2016 9:49 PM # 
Yeah man WRE, hence the dumb rules.
Oct 6, 2016 10:33 PM # 
You know, we pay 250 Euro for the privilege of hosting a WRE, and I do kind of wonder what we get in return, since it's not as though the competition has greater depth at an Australian race just because it's a WRE, and all our NOLs are (meant to be) of championship standard anyway. Supposedly rankings influence start sequence at WOC?

I'd hoped to have one of the Pittwater NOLs next March as a WRE but because it's a 1: 10 000 map originally drawn with (slightly smaller than) 1: 15 000 symbol sizes, that plan didn't even get past OA's mapping chair.
Oct 6, 2016 10:38 PM # 
having run the same(ish) course on both 1:10000 and 1:15000 I found the amiens section better at 15 and cascades better at 10. the old amiens section is still really just an updated version of the 1991 map which was 1:15000 for everyone. I found at 1:15000 you don't notice as much of the stuff left off. cascades has so much detail its better at 1:10000.
It may only affect a few people - but while they still run the long on 1:15000 at woc I think we need to as well.
Oct 6, 2016 11:35 PM # 
Yep Bomb spot on re WOC (and that's really the only argument for ALWAYS using 15000) but for us blokes that only affects 1 of us (ok 2 next year) and he doesn't even live here! I reckon it's only a matter of time until we see a WOC long on 10000 but. Also agreed re Cascades vs Amiens, but that's kinda another issue...

Good point jennycas, and that's part of why oact wasnt keen to host a wre next year - it costs $ and requires a whole load of extra requirements to be met, without either getting more people on the start line (relative to a regular NOL) or making it a better race. I agree - our NOL standards are good.

Again since WR determines start order at WOC it is important, but (also) again our single (male) starter hasn't run a WRE in Australia in the last 5 (?) years...
Oct 7, 2016 5:04 AM # 
I like doing long courses on 1:15000 maps and I've never had a problem with too much detail but I didn't do this race and I can't think of anything similarly complex I've run on at 1:15 before that either. I think I'd happily run on more generalised 1:15 maps but the issue, I guess, is the cost of preparing and maintaining maps at both scales or otherwise limiting the areas use to one discipline. Of course, if we just ditch WREs that problem goes away :)

I think WREs are also intended to help to encourage international competitors by giving assurance of a quality event but I suspect travel times to Australia negate that except for the Kiwis, who seem to be happy enough already.
Oct 7, 2016 11:36 AM # 
Don't forget the regional championships. They are now intended by IOF to be the pinnacle of orienteering in each part of the world, which is why we have a 7-page application form to fill out for Oceania 2019, which we were going to host anyway...

(and actually, I do like 1: 15000 for races with good long route choice legs because it makes simplification easier although my eyesight for the detail in the control circle is not what it used to be)
Oct 7, 2016 1:09 PM # 
yeah so i haven't heard anyone ever say we should do away with 15000 altogether. the general feeling seems to be that a hard and fast rule isn't ideal - the map scale should be able to be chosen to best suit the map and/or course.

like variable speed limit signs on the road - drop the speed from 100kph to 80kph in heavy fog for example. keeping things like in the old days means you either have to drive too slow in fine weather, or people drive dangerously in bad weather ;)

This discussion thread is closed.