Orienteering race 31:03 [5] *** 2.75 km (11:17 / km) +90m 9:42 / km
spiked:13/16c slept:4.5 shoes: Adidas $42 Cleats
Sprint 1 at Miami-University Western Campus. The first three controls were in the woods, a fairly nice open woods. The fourth control was the first "urban" control, and I ran the line until I popped out of the woods and realized I was on the wrong side of a building. Lost about 25 seconds, I'd guess. The next couple controls were a little boring; flat, pick a route and just run clean. I started to relax, and then, boom, it got really interesting.
I had decided to run with a baseplate, in the hope that it would help me thumb and fold the map a little better, and the one thing that I don't do as well with a baseplate is point myself in right direction as I'm leaving a control. Tom Svobodny and I had an interesting discussion about this. He ran without a compass, and said he much prefers that. He follows the features and navigates off them. My approach is completely different. As I'm leaving a control (typically), I use my thumb compass to point my body toward the control, and then I start looking for features.
Where the baseplate got me today was as I left 6. I rotated right completely by eye, and looked for a bridge. I was expecting a big, substantial pedestrian bridge with a span of 50m or so. I didn't see it. I saw a little 4m crossing point, and I stopped to look. I simply didn't see the bridge. I was losing time, so I committed to the crossing, and almost immediately saw the bridge off to my right. At that point I changed course and went under the bridge and up a contour or so to the control through honeysuckle. 1:41 was my split. I'm guessing I lost at least 15 seconds. I'm not really blaming the baseplate, just my use of it. I should have been more aware and realized I needed to rotate toward that bridge walkway.
The next control was a similar awesome leg, with another bridge, and some complicated vegetation boundaries. I reverted into 1:10000 mode, and ran the line in honeysuckle when I should have popped out into the lawn area and saved maybe 20-30 seconds.
I really enjoyed this sprint. It had a few boring legs, but the good ones made up for it.
This was my first race on a 1:4000 map, and I now love 1:4000 maps. After I commented about the 1:5000 scale of the NAOC Sprint at McMaster University, that 1:4000 was the IOF-preferred scale, I went back and read the then current ISSOM 2005, and was surprised that the preference for 1:4000 was removed. I believe the last 3 WOCs used 1:4000, so I do sense an international preference for that scale.
Orienteering race 34:06 [5] *** 2.75 km (12:24 / km) +85m 10:44 / km
spiked:14/17c shoes: Adidas $42 Cleats
Sprint 2 at Miami University Peffer Woods. I think this is a new map.
Mike Minium set one of the best sprints I've ever run. This course was really cool. The first 5 controls reminded me of Sprint 1 at the 2006 Sprint Series Finals---Open lawn-type grass with the controls on trees and bushes with some controls in the woods a little. Then control 6 was a nice long leg (I'm guessing 500m?). Controls 6-13 were in a network of wide trails (rides) in an otherwise nasty green forest. One little control picking area 6-7-8-9 was this really crazy section in this complicated area of vegetation boundaries.
Again, the 1:4000 map is amazing, and I think I like these natural curvy rides and trails more than I like complicated areas of universities. (On the other hand, running around complicated urban areas is just so much fun.) I think someone needs to take another try at Bear Creek Scout Camp with the intent to make the courses more complicated. (That's because of the complicated vegetation boundaries and rides.)
I had three issues. At 9, I couldn't find an indistinct trail junction, and lost maybe 30 seconds. I lost maybe 10 seconds going into 12 (?), and about 20 leaving 12 to go to 13 (?). I ran most of the way, but I was beat.
If you missed this sprint2, you missed a good one. This is one of the best three sprints I've run. The other two are the 2006 Sprint Series Final (I ran the short one), and the NAOC McMaster University Sprint.
After the 5.1km Green yesterday, and these two 3+km sprints today, I skipped the night-O, and I'm hoping to not wimp out tomorrow for the Billy Pig (12.5km). I'm beat, though.
Note
Three things:
1. Turnout today was so light. It might be a record for the least attendence at an A-Meet. There were more people yesterday, and we're hoping the BillyPig is well-attended Monday. I just don't understand it. It was an awesome day of Sprints.
2. My ribs did hurt a little today. I think I just injured the muscles a little. I'm hoping that's all there is to it.
3. Up until now, the sprints I've set had pretty strict limits on the number of controls I could use, and I think that is something the course setter needs to avoid. Sprints need a lot of controls, or, as John Fredrickson says, they're just short regular courses. The 1:4000 map lets you set control picking sections with really intense changes of tempo and direction. If you use 6mm circles, and just let them touch, you can put controls 24m apart. Today's Sprint2 had a leg like that (with bigger circles, just touching) with an 11 second split. My gut says 18 controls is "normal" for a big sprint, just based on my recollection of looking at big sprint maps. I've never set a sprint with more than 14 controls, I think, and I'm planning to change that.
Note
I've been saving this rant for way too long.
Some time ago, Spike had some sprint design comments. Basically, it appears that the European thinking of sprints is that the problems need to be solved at full speed. I think that's bullshit.
Sprints, because they're shorter, allow the runner to run much faster than in middles or classics. That gives the setter the ability to force even more extreme tempo changes. To me, that's interesting. Problems that can be solved at full speed are boring, except as a part of a high-speed section that's setting you up for a problem that stops you in your tracks.