in: Kiki; Kiki > 2007-06-12;
| # Posted 2007-06-13 06:04:26 | |
| peggyd: | Yup, subtle is a good word for it.
Good luck. I have found I suck in it almost every time I venture out (and that includes a Fin 5 Day, a WOC, & 2 World Cups -- not my finest moments). I hope it goes better for you! |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 07:19:24 | |
| ebuckley: | Look on the bright side - it's 103 in Tuscon. |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 08:36:37 | |
| Swampfox: | But don't worry--it's bound to get warmer again by the time you get back. |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 09:45:35 | |
| Wyatt: | I didn't know you were Wold Cupping - good luck! I hope you get an early start because spectating from the forest is fun... |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 09:46:16 | |
| Wyatt: | And I almost didn't notice as I was writing my own comment, but I swear I saw a Swampfox... |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 10:33:13 | |
| Jagge: | The area is exceptionaly detailed, it's not like that everywhere. The map is very very detailed and difficult to read, but still it is generalized a lot - there so much details everywhere. The course was set just for you, so there was no elephant trails leaind from control to control. There was no big control flag to spot, only those tiny streamers. You are not used to run in a terrain like this, you have to look at your feet more at first and it leaves less time for looking around/ahead or at map (for examle I was standing on a knoll Speedy run by, he did notice me untill he was 5 meters away).
This all made it pretty difficult for you. And note, the middle part of the course is about as difficult as it gets what it comes to orienteering in a detailed areas. All races you will be running here will be a lot easier than this. |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 20:26:42 | |
| chitownclark: | Jagge, I guess it's all relative, as they say...
My question, as I prepare to come over for the Fin5 next month is...can Finnish orienteers really read all those small details? And run with confidence, as tho they were navigating through the center of town? I thought Cristina's log entry exactly summarized my feelings the last time I orienteered in Finland. |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 20:35:52 | |
| bubo: | Iīd say itīs all a matter of speed. If the mapper can put all this detail onto the map - provided he puts it in the right place - it can also be read... (well, heīs walking of course).
The trick is really to simplify and only read the significant features while on the leg and read the finer detail closer to the control. Of course itīs easy to say how it should be done - another thing to actually master this. It takes a lot of practice - and thatīs for sure ;) |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 20:51:01 | |
| chitownclark: | Well, given the subtlety of Finnish (and Swedish, for that matter) terrain, can you or Jagge provide a list of your 5 favorite catching features, arranged in order of preference?
In other words, if you need to relocate, because you just lost contact in some typically flat featureless area, what reliable features do you look for, besides obvious man-made features? Any "rules of thumb" you can provide? |
| # Posted 2007-06-13 20:53:45 | |
| Jagge: | Here is yesterday's course:
http://www.routegadget.net/gpsoblog/cgi-bin/reitti... --- Well, if you are used to it, you can read "everything" if you move slow enough and stop if needed. But there is no point reading everything. Better to read only enough to know where you are and where you are going to. For exmple, there is no need to read every stone around one/two controur hill if you already know it is the right hill. So the key thing is knowing it's the right hill already in advange, before you come to the actual spot. And at the actual spot you should be reading map of 50-100m away ahead, not the spot you are standing on. Also, you shuld see the map as a group of objects. You cant remember everything if you think it like that. When you look at the map, you should get some sort of " 3D model" of the terrain in front of you and use and compare it against the real world you see when you runt throught the same area. This 3D model you get in your head is never perfect, but you kind of used all the deta the was in the map to build it. So you kind of read "eryhting". So it kind of depends how like you see this all. I am not sure did I write it clear enough but hope you got the point.... |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 01:21:05 | |
| Sandy: | Definitely got the point; definitely need to work on doing this! Thanks so much for setting the course and meeting us and giving us maps and everything. |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 03:37:45 | |
| bubo: | if you need to relocate, because you just lost contact in some typically flat featureless area
The best thing to do is never end up being 'lost' in a flat featureless area ;) At Jukola this year - and I guess at FIN5 (Jagge, is that so?) - the terrain would almost certainly consist of enough detail for that to not happen. As for catching features, they depend on the actual terrain, so the 'order of preference' might be different in different places: 1) The obvious of course would be man-made features like roads and paths 2) It is also good to use the occasional field or meadow... (distinct vegetation boundaries of any kind are good - also when it comes to logged areas and/or 'green forest') 3) Contour features are always present and if knolls, ridges and such are large/distinct enough they make good catching features (as do cliffs). 4) Open marshes also make good reference points when passing them on your route. 5) Water features like small lakes/ponds and streams are other natural candidates... I guess this is a list of just about every available feature on a map. I donīt mention boulders since I donīt consider them 'catching' on their own, but of course I use them to check off the map when passing a particularly obvious one. Another thing Iīm not used to using much in Sweden, that is very much in existence on Finnish maps is 'bare rock'. I like using it to find a good runnable route, but I wouldnīt say that I master the technique to well since Iīve only run 15-20 times in Finland. |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 04:02:39 | |
| jjcote: | 1) The obvious of course would be man-made features like roads and paths
Beware of paths that have existed for only a few hours (and are not on the map) if you are not an early starter. |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 04:26:13 | |
| Suzanne: | The course looks fun. Thanks for posting it. |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 10:57:11 | |
| Jagge: | The best thing to do is never end up being 'lost' in a flat featureless area
Yes. And there is no point trying to relocate on such a place, better go an and relocate in a place with enough "something". Sometimes you need to relocate, but should almost never need to search your location from bigger area than about 200 m diameter. If you did it right, you only 100-300 meter earlier knew where you were and where you were going to, so if it now does not match, you should not be far, usually just a knoll next to the one you planned to run by. If you really really are lost and you need to relocate (or you are making a relocation traing, following someone without map for 15 min and then you need to show where you are), you can try these methods: step1: - figure out where you last time knew your location - figure out the approximate firection you were running since - figure out how far yo umust have gone -> you should get some sort of 500 m diameter area step 2. look around. Usually you are on a some kind of hill. Figure out that direction is "straight down" and in what direction contour go (90 degree from down) - use your compass. Take a look at your map and see where is such places/hillsides with contours going in that direction. This works if it's not completerly flat. Now you should have 1-3 alternatives. step 3. Try to read details. they should match at least for one of the places. If it's not clear, guess on and go on though your contols. when you have jogged 50 meter and you see new details, compare those alternatives you got and pick the right one. If nothing matches, try again from step 1. Of course you can use roads and man made features if there is any, this was for the worst case scenario for running on a map without much such a features. But like I said it should never have to go this far.... |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 12:28:42 | |
| jwolff: | In addition to what Jagge has said, I can only remind you of what another big o-philosopher has written. Tero explains how he did in winning the middle distance in WOC2004, and that is the way you do it in Scandinavian terrain. Except that the world champ is slightly more extreme in his approach than most orienteers.
The reason to why you're lost in Finland is often a parallel error, i.e. you have followed an forward approach but set of in a slightly wrong direction, up the wrong hill or down the wrong reentrant. The terrain has been similar enough to what you awaited to give you the confidence to go on. Then you have to strategies; find out where you are or were you went wrong, whichever is faster.... Excellent course by Jagge, btw. |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 18:30:55 | |
| chitownclark: | Very interesting, even tho in French. Here is the entire course, map and cluesheet.
Even tho I don't read French, it is interesting to see how Thierry simplified the map for each leg. And by looking at the few features that remain on his simplified map, the features he used to navigate by are evident. How did you obtain this nice description? Using the "archives" button on Tero's website I can only get a few runs going back to April 2006. Is an English-language version of Tero's comments available for this 2004 analysis, as there is for many of Thierry's other website offerings? |
| # Posted 2007-06-14 19:23:39 | |
| bubo: | Iīve read an English version of this analysis. Iīll see if I can find it - I may have it on my computer even...
Edit: Found it!! |
You must be logged in to add a message
