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

Training Log Archive: cedarcreek

In the 7 days ending Nov 12, 2006:

activity # timemileskm+m
  Orienteering1 1:56:15 4.21(27:36) 6.78(17:09) 385
  Walking1 55:00 2.42(22:42) 3.9(14:06) 50
  Running1 31:40 2.6(12:10) 4.19(7:33) 75
  Total3 3:22:55 9.24(21:58) 14.87(13:39) 510

«»
1:56
0:00
» now
MoTuWeThFrSaSu

Saturday Nov 11, 2006 #

Orienteering race 1:56:15 [4] *** 6.78 km (17:09 / km) +385m 13:21 / km
shoes: Adidas $42 Cleats

ICO Event, Camp Ransburg Scout Camp, Bloomington, IN
Red Course set by Karan Keith

I was up late last night, and got about 3 hours of sleep before driving to meet hkleaf to carpool to Bloomington. The main attraction for me was the meet announcement that said, "an A-Meet quality map", and Gerald's was that and the blue course.

The map was very nice. I kept thinking it looked like Oak Mountain. The map has significant green on it, but it was just very pleasant to run through (in most places). The relief for most of the big spurs is 60-65m.

I really enjoyed the course. It had a lot of climb (385m is an estimate.) This course reminded me of the 2006 Flying Pig Relay courses, which some idiot set to go up and down and up and down.

I didn't study the legs when I copied the map, and the first leg had a really neat little problem. I didn't look at it until I turned my map over at the start, and I picked a decent route, but maybe not the best. (I went by a little firing range, and was surprised that the map didn't use the big arrow symbol. There was a mapped fence around it, and I almost jumped it, but my boy scout training kicked in and said, "You can't go across the firing range fence!"

Orienteering in Cincinnati has made me gunshy about crossing reentrants and streams. I always aim for likely good crossing points. This map is largely unlike Cincinnati in that it was fairly easy to cross a large portion of the streams. It's weird to look at mapped streams that have no contours on either side of them.

I missed a really nice route choice on my 4-5 (115 to 306). There was a right-hand route that saved a ton of climb, and didn't look too nasty. I took the left-hand route that climbed about 50m all at once. It wasn't terribly difficult, but it was a little tricky due to some subtle attackpoints where you needed to leave the road.

I think this section 4-10 was my favorite part of the whole course. It started out with a lot of contouring and reading the map, and then it had a nice little easy leg along the lake, and then a neat leg across some flat vegetation/marsh, into a little 100mx100m patch of extreme open forest.

Red 10 (314) gave me absolutely no trouble. It was a complete spike, although I think I got a little lucky. I wasn't making sense of the map, and I just kept moving north until I saw a reentrant (the clue) and when I got there, there was a bag in it. It looks like the circle is a little off here.

I had some issues with the course, but after talking to the course setter, it appears the one big mistake was the way the circles were drawn on the master map. This was a small event, and time was short, so I can't be too critical here, but...

It's so easy to use OCAD or Condes to draw the circles and control codes and then to print maps for the people hanging bags and to print a master course map for each course for people who are drawing their own map, that it seems like a false economy not to. I certainly understand having someone draw their own map, but please make sure the master is perfect.

I meant to ask if ICO considered printing advanced maps on 8.5x11 inch paper (preprinted). I love having the whole map, but honestly, I'd rather not have to draw my course. I don't need a legend, and you can always use OCAD to make up a sheet of legends (like 20 per sheet of 11x17 (about A3 size)) to hand out to people who need them. Red looks like it would fit, but Blue was just a little too big (for 8.5x11 inch paper (about A4 size).

I had trouble with 11 (315), which I thought was hung about 50m or so off. I didn't lose much time (seconds). I didn't stop to check it, but it just seemed wrong. Part of the problem was the new scout buildings in many places. I wasn't sure if they were new sometimes, or if the mappers didn't map the buildings with no walls. My guess is the buildings are new.

I'd love to see ICO do an A-Meet here (at least one day). Avoid warm weather to make the vegetation as good as it was today, and I think people will love it.

Note

I'm not sure I like to criticize events in the interest of meet quality. Especially on 3 hours sleep, I feel like a grumpy old man.

"When I was a kid, we didn't have maps! If you wanted a map, ya made it yourself with an old newpaper and some toothpicks dipped in coal tar!"

Friday Nov 10, 2006 #

Walking 55:00 [1] * 3.9 km (14:06 / km) +50m 13:15 / km

Walked around the trails and lawns of a potential mapping project. "Undisclosed location", to follow the recent AP language.

Pretty interesting place. It might have some land ownership issues. I need to get on that county's online GIS and verify the landownership. I would have gone to two different counties' GIS offices today, but they were both closed.

It's amazing sometimes how you look at the aerial photos and you get an idea in your head of what it will be like. This place was completely unlike the idea in my head. The buildings in particular were not what I expected.

I also did a tiny bit of research (online and in the field) for another potential sprint site that Mike M. mentioned to me a month or so ago. It has other issues, but if we can figure them out, it will be really cool. (No time logged for that---just driving around).

Wednesday Nov 8, 2006 #

Running 31:40 [4] 4.19 km (7:33 / km) +75m 6:56 / km

First run in a long time. I did a lot of walking around and a little running last weekend, but my last race was Oct 22, and my last actual running workout was Oct 3. So you could say I've had a mega-taper, which might explain what happened tonight.

Basically, I had an awesome fun run on my one-hill plus rec center route. I started out not being able to find my shoes. I actually didn't even find them; I wore the Nike's that hurt my knees a few months ago. They didn't hurt tonight, and they're actually lighter and more flexible than my Brooks. I think I might get sore from them, though.

I wore shorts and a long-sleeve T, and I could see my breath a few times. I just found out it's about 43F (6C) outside, so that doesn't seem possible, but there it is. It was cool, but not cold. I guessed it was 52F. Go figure. I did notice heavy dew, and I did see my breath, so maybe it's just that it's 100% humidity.

Anyway, I was running down the big hill, and I noticed I was taking big strides and just pounding my joints. I read something last week about the African marathoners who have these really efficient strides, but very high turnover, so I shortened my stride, actually sped up a bit since I wasn't hitting the ground so hard, and started thinking, "Man, this is the way to run."

At the very bottom of the hill, where I have to go back uphill, I was sucking air like Hammer at this year's Flying Pig sprint (which means I could be heard from some distance). I actually had to recover for about 3 minutes (maybe 12min/km pace) as I went around the rec, and then I started back up the big hill. I was having "intestinal difficulties", but I got through it, and about 6 minutes from the end, I thought I might have a new PR. Now don't get me wrong, I was still pretty slow, but it felt bouncy and fast, and it was just great. At the top of the hill, I had to recover (slow pace) for about a minute, and then I just started speeding up again. I was working on a quick turnover, and although I did slip into a big stride a few times, I did pretty well. This isn't my PR by much, maybe a minute, but it's still a PR. And it was awesome.

Tuesday Nov 7, 2006 #

Note

I thought of one more.

There was exactly one control site (of about 24) I did not visit beforehand to verify the clue. It was 4 on Green. Southern distinctive tree. In the circle, there were three trees in a triangle shape. The east one turned out to be a stump. This would have been an easy map change (and clue change), but I was short on time and decided every other tree I saw on the map was still there. And if you want to get picky, it also needed south-side in the clue.

I already put this in the comments, but:
Green Map

Monday Nov 6, 2006 #

Note

I am so sore today. I think going up and down those gullies was like a strength workout. I aggravated my left foot big toe MTP joint again.

Note

I spent some time today considering my event yesterday compared with the MVOC event two weeks ago that I complained about.

On the one hand, I legitimately believe we and I need to get better at event quality. On the other hand, though, you can never tell how someone will handle the complaints. I really like to hear about problems with my courses. I figure it's the only way I'm going to get better.

My long leg (600+m) on Brown was boring. I think Brown runners really want some difficult navigation. A longer leg on Brown really needs to be interesting. I've had missed messages regarding sprint type legs for Brown. I get the impression the woods is vastly preferred over sprint-type legs, but I also get the impression our Brown runners haven't run too many sprints. A sprint for older, slower runners might be different in nature than just a short regular sprint. I'll have to think about that.

I had the wrong size circles for every course but Green. I originally exported the courses (only---no map) at 1:7500, but the map was really 1:10000 (in OCAD native scale). So I changed the map scale to 1:10000, and I didn't notice that Condes automatically changed the print scale to 1:10000. So when I exported courses to OCAD, and printed maps at 1:7500, the course symbols were too big.

I wanted Green to have a preprinted clue sheet, or more correctly, I wanted all the other courses to have a readable legend (with stand alone clue sheets). So I had to reexport the Green course to get the clue sheet to look right, and when I did that I noticed the print scale was wrong.

I should have had course notes to explain the trail situation. I noticed the trails were wrong, but it didn't strike me as being unreasonable. The map is 4 years old, and it's a heavy mountain bike area. I noticed the trails were the same as mapped, slightly changed (tree down), or invisible. In other places I noticed new trails, but not in areas used by the easier courses. I don't think any of the experienced orienteers had trouble, but I think the younger competitors weren't prepared for inaccurate trails. When you can't find a trail, you look for other features to use. I notice Adam had a 12 minute split on number 2, which should have been an easy 150+ meters from 1. 1-2 looks almost trivial on the map, but the trails disappear as you get close to the long clearing, and if you don't know to trust that part of the map (and not the trails), you'll have trouble.

I could go on, but my point is that when you point a finger at someone else, you've got three fingers pointing back at yourself.

« Earlier | Later »