Discussion: Sweden adopts 7,500 scale for M/F 45-

FYI, The Swedish Orienteering Federation recently announced new map scale rules
(keep in mind that the below news release is google translated, lightly edited and shortened):

Larger map scale for young and old
Starting in 2019, 1:7,500 and 1:3,000 scale will be the new standard for forest and sprint maps for M/F 45 and older. For M/F 16 and younger, 1:10,000 will be the standard for long distance courses.

A working group consisting of nine people with different backgrounds presented a rule change proposal that was adopted by the Board of the Swedish Orienteering Federation on December 3rd, 2018.
- “Not being able to read the map symbols makes orienteering frustrating. Many people who struggle with map legibility leave our sport. Therefore, we are pleased that this decision will make orienteering a more inclusive sport, an activity where everyone can participate and on more equal terms”, says Niklas Wrane, the Swedish Orienteering Federation’s map coordinator who also headed up the working group.

The following map scale rules are in effect from 1/1/2019

Long- and ultra-long distances:
1:15,000 in classes M/F 18, M/F 21
1:10,000 in M/F 10-16, M/F 35-40
1:7 500 in M/F 45 and older

Middle distance, relay and night-O:
1:10,000 in M/F 10-40
1:7,500 in M/F 45 and older

Maps should always be drafted at 1:15,000 scale in accordance with map specifications. Other scales should be magnifications from 1:15,000, incl. the printed courses. An exemption for larger and smaller map scale can be sought.

http://www.svenskorientering.se/Nyheter/NyheterSta...

I need to move. I'm getting desperate!

Many of us have been doing this for years.The only surprise is that in the forest, older Swedes are to get 200% of elite scale, in sprints which I guess are largely urban, 133%.

Our Canadian guidelines also allow for 1:7,500 for older categories. The only complication is our course/category structure yields 1:7,500 at age 45+ for women but age 65+ for men. Which, seems a bit strange.

And for long courses, M35's are "lucky" enough to get 1:15,000, whereas F35's get 1:10,000.

Last weekend I was on Course 5B. Course 5A, for some younger classes, was identical except for the map scale.

@gruver: Printing several courses at multiple scales is the standard way to handle this issue, i.e. even on the "Ås by Night & Fog Cup" winter-time night series they have now a special Masters class which typically has the same course as H17-Short but printed in 1:7500 instead of typically offset print 1:10K.

The fun part here is that Sweden have really dragged their feet over scale issues, just a few years ago they forced "Gränsjakten", a two-day event in the same area as the 2016WOC races, to stop offering 1:7500 to 55+ runners: The treat was that the entire event would be cancelled after the fact and all the result lists deemed void.

I'm surprised that the lower age cutoff for standard scales is 18 and not 16, since there are international competitions (eg EYOC) for 16+, and many 16s run up in the 20E classes. Simona Aebersold for example won a JWOC medal when she was still eligible for W16.

I am planning the Australian Sprint Championships this year, and 16s will get 1:4000, while 14 and under and 45+ will get 1:3000.

BTW, re enlarging 1:15K maps to 1:5K for the oldest runners:

You really cannot do this properly without adding additional north lines, since the 1:15K north line interval means that after tripling the scale, you are very likely to have zero north lines visible within the compass housing.

Here in Norway I recommend adding a duplicate north line symbol and use that for the intermediate lines. They will normally be hidden except when enlarging a lot.

Simmo, only 133% enlargement for your sprint? May be enough for the early onset presbyopia, but it keeps going...

It's a 33% enlargement, not 133%.

Terje, thats how I handled north lines on the old specification. Saves duplication and then versioning issues.

Semantics tRicky. A 33% enlargement is a contradiction. It wouldn't be an enlargement at all, but a reduction by two thirds.

Gruver, it's not many years since most sprint maps were 1:5000, so 1:3000 really represents a 166% enlargement. And the enlargement from 1:4000 to 1:3000 is the same ratio as from 1:10000 to 1:7500. Aside from WOCs, there aren't too many events using 1:15000 maps these days.

A sign of the ageing of the participant population.

Actually most long champs I've done of late (in the 21E class) have been 1:15,000 the exception being the long day at Easter in Tas last year, which came as a bit of a surprise in the event info. Mind you it's also the only long champs I've done in the past 28 months.

Simmo lets define what we're starting from.

An ISOM map is drawn "as if for 1:15,000", and we must presume that it will be legible at that scale for those in the prime of life at 1:15,000. Sweden (and many other countries with or without writing it down) have been using enlargements at 150% and 200%. (Is that OK tRicky?)


An ISSOM map might possibly have been drawn "as if for 1:5000" but the IOF has always allowed drawing as if for 1:4000 with the same symbol sizes I suspect that most urban sprint maps make use of this to put in more detail, to the level that is readable for those in the prime of life. In a sprint I need to quickly read small gaps and differences in line thickness to even determine whether passage is possible and allowed, I reckon the 1:4000-3000 enlargement isn't a big enough recognition for my eyesight. And not nearly as much as Sweden has done for ISOM.

But perhaps you do your urban mapping as if for 1:5000 (as I do). Then I'll ask please for 1:2500 for oldies.

I've drawn quite a few sprint maps in my time, the earlier ones were all fieldworked at 1:2500 for 1:5000 final scale. The last few years I've only used 1:4000 scale, and I take a 1:2000 base into the field. The current Oz Champs map is the first for which I've had LIDAR available, all the previous ones were fieldworked from aerial photography only. Sometimes I would take 1:1000 prints of the photos for very detailed areas, but only to use for easier identification of features. Contours would be added later, but the majority of those maps were flattish with only simple contour details. The LIDAR is great, especially the hill shading, in combination with the photography, although I've found that the contours (0.25m) required some manipulation to determine the correct 2m continuous level in very detailed areas (there was extensive former quarrying activity on parts of the map).

This is the first event where I will use 1:3000 for some classes, though I've run on a few 1:2500 and 1:3000 maps, particularly in Melbourne. It's also the first map where I've seriously tried to follow the minimum dimensions in the new draft ISSOM - and it ain't easy let me tell you.

Do you really think the 20% difference between 2.5k and 3k will be enough? At speed? My feeling is that adjustments to your sprint orienteering technique and your eye correction equipment should be adequate to compensate for worsening visual capacity.

Perhaps this is an area where something like the IOF MC could take the lead and publish a table of suggested enlargements. Try to get some standardisation.

if you take 15000 - 10000 and 10000 - 7500 as established norms you should be looking at around 133 - 150%.

So:

map scale______133- 150%|_______ suggested enlargement scale

15000_______11250 - 10000_______10000
10000_______ 6666 - 7500_________ 7500

7500________ 5000 -5625 _________ 5000

5000________3333 - 3750__________3500
4000________2666 - 3000__________3000

3000________2000 - 2250 _________2000

BTW: isn't the soon to come ISSOM about to make all sprint maps 4000???

In the draft new ISSOM they are suggesting 1:3000 should be used for older and 'the youngest' age groups.