Discussion: Possum Trot Report

Possum Trot IX results
(times are based on my memory; could be off a bit):

Mark "Mook" Everett 2:20
Mikell "Swampfox" Platt 2:23
Eric Buckley 2:47

Sunny clear day; temperature was 13F at the start.
Big hills with some thick woods made for a physical course.

"Physical" means 850 m climb over a little less than 15 km - Mike seems to set them harder each year. Good ridge-and-rentrant terrain, though. Contour navigation wasn't so hard.

Some more times from memory:

Tom Carr 2:49
JP Ingebretson 3:02
Mike Eglinski 3:03
Pete Curtis 3:04

I'm sure analysis will be forthcoming from a few APers.

Map is here. It was rotated 45 degrees to fit on one piece of paper, sorry about the seams.

The map looks like WOC 2005 in Japan.

Yeah, it was hilly. But no one got shot! I did see several deer and almost mistook them for very fast orienteers, so I can see how a hunter might make the opposite mistake. Though I'd imagine that shooting a slow deer isn't as much fun, and the resulting food might be suspect.

I never did see the waiver that Swampfox reported, but it should have included, "You will be subjected to oxygen debt inducing climbs, anti-personnel fences, and snow-covered rocky slopes determined to rip off portions of your fleshy parts."

Even though I never recovered from blowing #12 severely, I really enjoyed the course.
Thanks to the organizers and the setter and other volunteers. It was a blast.

The P-Trot allows the dropping of any two controls. What do the arm-chair orienteers think were the most popular pair of controls dropped?

I wasn't there either, but 4 & 13 looks appealing to me.

We were only allowed to drop one control this year instead of two. Presumably because the course didn't have enough climb :)

Results are here and they show who skipped which control, but don't look until you've made your choice! (Hint: there's one that stands out, 10 of 20 people skipped it.)

It should be noted that many of the 10 that chose the preferred skip felt at the time it was not the best choice, but dictated by the cirumstances of head to head competition. My anal-retentive skip analysis will have to wait until more people post splits because my watch failed.

Likewise, my early skip choice (4) was based mostly on the fact that I had a terrible start, losing any contact with similar speed people. So I used the skip to try to catch a group that I could keep up with, which worked, though we/they didn't really stick together long.

It looks like 4 is a good skip. With that private property/OB on the way from 21-23 it seems to complicate that route.

I planned to skip 22, but changed my mind because of the private property (where shots were fired at a night rogaine last spring).

I skipped 15.

On my way from 21 to 22, I decided I need a rest and started to run the road route, which would take me through the private area. I'd forgotten all about it. I was right behind Buckley and Carr and as they headed off toward 23, they reminded me that the private property was the guy with the guns and dogs. A second or two later and the dogs started barking.

I'm pretty sure the road is public -- though on the map it is marked as out of bounds, so it is out of bounds.

I climbed back up the spur and ran to 22. It certainly cost me a bit of time. I was mad at myself for failing to realize that I wouldn't be able to get through the area (especially since I'd already decided not to skip 22 because I wanted to avoid dealing with the private area).

Live and learn.

We were hoping that the dogs would ignore us as they sat down to their meal of frozen Spike.

I was all alone in choosing to skip 18, and that was mainly dictated by my energy level at the time. At the 2nd water stop, I kept expecting David and JP to come bursting out of the woods behind me any second, so I took the easy road run and easy approach to 19. I didn't learn until later about David's unfortunate loss near 17.

My skip choice didn't save that much time, though. 15 was a lot better (second choice), or 4 (but I wanted to save my skip for when I tired out). Like Spike, I planned on visiting 22 thanks to our buddy in the flannel long johns.

Ricka's question is still interesting, though - if we had had two skips, which would they be? 5-6 looks good but a bit early, 4-15 is probably better.

From my armchair, I agree with Pete -- I think 4 or 15 is best, but his choice (18) looks pretty good, too. I don't understand 22. I eagerly await Eric's anal retentive skip analysis.

Well, unless some folks enter some splits, there won't be one. Anyway, 22 seems fairly obvious to me. The private property isn't really an issue. The only change I would have made to my route would have been to stay on the trail (actually a gravel road) for another 200m or so. I'd have considered this a good skip candidate even if the road didn't exist.

I'm reasonably sure (though still need some splits to verify) that 4 is the optimal skip if one was running the race solo. It comes so early in the race however that the almost-as-good skips of 22 and 15 seem better choices. The main reason I don't like 15 is that it doesn't cut out any climb. Seems like removing an easy, flat leg on a course like this is a mistake. I think 18 is also good, but I didn't really notice it until after I had committed to going there.

Skipping only one control! That was what made the Possum Trot unique.

I think skipping #4 was a good choice with only one skip allowed. However, I like #22 a little better. Had I run it, I may have done it because it comes later in the race. It seems to me that a skip saving equal distance later in the race may be better because one is usually moving slower later in the race. #22 also saves more climb than #4. The road run to the edge of the out of bounds area then north would be fast too.

Okay Eric, my splits probably won't be too useful for your analysis (I took an awfully long time on my skip, and missed the split for 15), but hopefully they'll get the ball rolling for others to enter theirs. Not even sure I even entered mine right, I missed quite a few...

I was misreading the contours -- I thought 21-22 was downhill. Even now, looking at the map I have a hard time figuring out up & down. I guess I could use some pointers there.

I still have trouble with up and down too, but there are a two tricks that help me.

1) Look for water. If there is a creek, it's a ravine. This technique is more prone to errors if there are blue north lines or lots of ridgeline trails.

2) Learn local erosion patterns. Pay attention to the shape of gullies and how they fork. On this map the gullies are much more narrow than the bulges between. If your reverse things you'll see a lot of sharp spurs with mild reentrants. The differences on this map are pretty subtle though.

This particular map seems especially tough because the ridge tops are mapped very flat. To me this looks like a flat valley floor (something I see more often). Between 20 and 21, it doesn't help that a contour is obscurred by the powerline.

I had a hard time reading the contours during the race - particularly on the leg from 10-11. I'm not sure why as this terrain is not atypical for Missouri. Glad to hear it wasn't just me.

As I went to 12--I came in from the road--I wasn't sure about the location. I thought it was on the ridge top. Thinking that would be the flatest area around. Unfortunately it was not. the actual ridge top was obscured by the number for the control. I also could have figured it out by the number of contours, but in MN we generally don't orienteer on many ridges that tall or steep, so I think that's where I blew it.

It was tough but great to be on a new map and different terrain from what I am used to.

My skip choice was pretty poor. #3. I should have just stayed with the group I was with (JP, Pete, Dave and others) they caught me going to control 7 anyway. But I thought it might save some energy. Lesson learned...maybe.

Comments on contours:

#12 (Jerrit): Having that wide of a plateau half-way up a hill is really unusual (in Midwest and elsewhere) which makes it a real challenge to read. If you do read it as a plateau, its a great feature to use!

#21-#22 (dness): Confusion -about 30% of the way, the large flat spur on left really does look like a nice broad re-entrant to follow downhill. But just beyond that (40-45% of leg), left and right of red-line, are two very distinct midwestern re-entrants - hence must be high; then downhill to blue. (That's a lot harder to see 2+ hours into a race!)

I do remember crossing a road at Rockwoods (STL)looking for a huge spur - it was frustrating that all I could see in front of me was a huge re-entrant :).

In Colorado, I learned that maps end half-way down hills - even when the hill just keeps on going.

Possum Trot report is here! Includes maps and routes for both days, including the Micro-O that was really quite interesting.