Discussion: Do single day champs have immunity from protests?

First, I'll refer you to Peter's blog post Saturday April 14, 12pm where he discusses protests and some of his thought processes. (Hit PG under noisy logs.)

After seeing that #6 might have prevented me from winning, Peter asked me Saturday evening why I didn't protest Saturday's Brown course. I replied "two years in a row? I thought that would be too much."

There is another more serious reason. Syracuse was a two day total time event, and there was another day of competition to sort things out fairly in the field. Saturday's long event was only a single day and a successful protest does not leave the same possibility. As I was punching #6, there was no 'grey' whatsoever in my mind about the merits of that potential protest. What would be gained?

Hit PG under noisy logs

I can see this being complicated for a couple of reasons, but the picture is amusing nonetheless.

I had the same thoughts as Francis re: single-day event. I lost a minute or so at 6, as you can see from my Forerunner track.

I went past the circle a bit (and never noted any man-made item there), then turned back NNE. You can see where my direction changed SE of the circle (to head to 7), which is where the barrel actually was.

From Track jpg files

Mike notes he alerted the GA organizers to the problem; all they really needed to do was move the barrel to the circled location on the map!

Sounds like the organisers are holding you over a barrel.

Is the question a furphy? IOF (and Orienteering Australia) rules (27-30) don't allow protests until after there has been a complaint, and a decision about the complaint has been made by the organiser. A complaint would probably result in the case of this event, in the organiser voiding the course - as per IOF 26.13 'The organiser must void a race if circumstances have arisen which make the race significantly unfair.' Then a protest could be made about that decision, but it is hard to envisage a jury overturning it. (I am conscious that OUSA Rules could be different, but they probably shouldn't - the complaint-then-organiser decision-then protest system is much preferable as it tends to deflect frivolous protests.)

In terms of 'Is there a consensus that people don't make complaints about unfair circumstances at single day championships because it is likely to result in voiding?' I would say 'Yes', particularly in veteran classes at state level, and even national level in the smaller orienteering nations.

The most recent solution I've seen to this is voiding the single legs that there was a problem with. There are still problems with this though

You are right about there being problems with that can of worms. OA Rules have a separate appendix 'Guidelines regarding complaints and protests' which state 'It is tempting, but almost always wrong, to try to make use of the electronic punching split times to 'remove' a problem control.' I think this is also IOF's view, but is not specifically in their Rules. Probably is in their Tech Comm meeting minutes though.

There's been plenty of debate about this in previous AP threads, and I'd be pretty certain that many of the situations which make it problematic would have occurred at last weekend's event.

Process and terminology: a "complaint" in US would be something unofficial, that presumably would be resolved without affecting other runners. For example, my epunch didn't register, I pin punched on my map. A "protest" involves something like Brown #6 at US long. The control was significantly misplaced, affected runners differently. A protest is considered by a jury of experienced orienteers. The jury for a meet is established ahead of time. The jury considers the protest, goes out and looks at the control, makes a decision, including the possibility of voiding a course, and including any other remedy they feel may be more appropriate. Don't like the answer? File a grievance, considered after the fact by the OUSA grievance committee. Protests don't happen all that often, I am not aware of any significant number of what might be called "frivolous" protests. If a protest doesn't have merit, it gets denied. Grievances are rare, less than one per year. Most in the last 15 years or so have dealt with team selection and eligibility/disqualification issues. If a grievance alleges that, for example, a flag was really in the wrong place, while the jury thinks it was in the right place, the grievance would likely be denied, since the judgment of experienced orienteers who actually visited the site would be given very heavy weight. If the grievance alleges the jury didn't follow the rules, the grievance committee would evaluate the circumstances and might overrule the jury if the rules were not followed. A meet director does not have the discretion to void a course. That is reserved to a jury.

Like Simmo, I commend the complaint-first procedure. Where things are cut and dried, it is faster and removes the "bad taste" associated with a protest. Grievance Committee? Good grief!

So what is a complaint? Just an expression of dissatisfaction? How does one resolve a complaint?

A complaint is what would be a protest under your system. IOF Rule 27.1 'A complaint may be made about infringements of the Rules or the organiser's directions.' 27.2 'Complaints may only be made by team officials or competitors.' 27.3 Any complaint shall be made in writing to the organiser as soon as possible. A complaint is adjuducated by the organiser. The complainant shall be informed about the decision immediately.' 28.1 'A protest may be made against the organiser's decision about a complaint.' Only then is a jury required. In most cases in Australia since this system came in, complaints have generally been resolved without a protest and need for a jury. And I believe when a jury has been required, most have upheld the organiser's decision.

In practice, most organisers would consult the rules (particularly 26.13 referred to above), and consult with the Controller/Event Advisor and the course setter before making their decision.

Back to the original question on protesting at a one day event: the competitor has only one chance to get it right at a one-day race. The same should apply to the organizers. If they don't get it right, and made a mistake, then the course should be protested and the organizers take responsibility, as applicable. This weekend, no one protested the misplaced control, and as a result, all the competitors are bearing the consequences of that mistake, instead of the organizers. Doesn't seem right, IMHO.

Brown got is bad: # 3 was misplaced too, by ~ 40 m to the North, Janet's track does not show it because she adjusted it in QuickRoute

I understand the argument about not protesting a single-day race, particularly a championship, where the end-result if the protest were upheld would be to strip the awarding of medals to the winners. But what about the possibility of awarding medals, publishing results (perhaps with a disclamor), but not counting the results in the OUSA rankings?

And yes, I was one of the competitors that got burned on Brown, by both #3 and #6. Only 2 minutes lost on 3, but 6 was a 19 minute leg. Ouch!!

Grievance Committee? Good grief!

This is a result of orienteering being recognized as a sport by the US Olympic Committee. When USOF applied for membership, there were a number of requirements, one of these being that the national governing body had to have a provision in its bylaws for resolving grievances. As Charlie notes, grievances are rarely filed, and it's even more rare for one to pertain to course setting details.

Furphy? Had to look it up, I didn't think you would be into fur groups or fetishes Simmo:-))

@ maprunner: if the course were voided then all the competitors certainly would be bearing the consequences. As it is, some are - sort of - happy, having perhaps achieved a higher placing than normal, some would be congratulating themselves on their ability to find a control that everyone else had problems with, while the ones who were disappointed at the time are probably now, on reflection, just saying to themselves "Oh well, I enjoyed the rest of the course and the other events, and there's always next year'. Meanwhile the organisers are certainly suffering the embarassment of this and other public discussions, which embarassment would not be any greater if there had been protests, probably less.

Seriously, consider the situation of Francis in the original post. If the control had not been misplaced, he might have gotten a gold medal. Without a protest, he gets a silver nothing and Bob Dennis gets the gold. If he protests and it's upheld, neither of them gets anything. What would be the benefit of protesting?

jjcote makes a signficant point. Voiding a race is a very unsatisfatory resolution to this - both within the sport and I feel it hampers any attempts to help people understand the sport more widely.

...voiding ... single legs...

Is an excellent solution easily doable thanks to SI. Needs a rules change, I suppose. And a mind set change; so to charge ahead after a WTF spirit deflation. I'm for it! Looked for that !@#$ barrel also.

@jjcote: Here's how I see it: if the control was misplaced and the results are screwed up, then the medal is meaningless. I don't want it. I would rather have no medal. However, I seem to be in the minority opinion on this point.

I'm with maprunner.

I also think that voiding a single leg is unacceptable, but maybe I'm also in the minority on that.

Nope, voiding single legs is absolutely unacceptable. This has been discussed a million times on Nopesport. The effects on confidence etc permeate through the entire race. I haven't ever though about stopping the race just before the misplaced control, but then if someone has been pacing themselves for a long course, that's also unfair. You just can't do it - void or let stand.

Further to my post above (Apr 17 4.32pm) I found the IOF Rule which prohibits removing a split: 24.15: The results must be based on competitors' times for the whole course. No changes may be made to these times on the basis of split times.

I suggest a petition.

Voiding a single leg is unacceptable.

@maprunner: That's fine, but it's not clear that protesting makes things better. The medal may be meaningless to you, and you may not want it, but is it better to take away the other guy's medal too? I guess you could take the position that the other guy having a medal dilutes the value of the medals that people in other categories got, but that's a stretch. (I'm not trying to say that people shouldn't protest when there's a problem, just that the motivation to do so is low because the resulting situation isn't an improvement.)

I'm not sure of a possible way to dilute the value of the medals.

Ranking fore each discipline, and if a championship race gets voided the three best ranked at the end of the year would get medals? A policy like that might make there more sense to make protest.

@jj - throwing out the course sends the message that we aspire to a higher standard of quality. I think that has value, moreso than a medal.

Voiding a championship race means that for that year, presumably there is no champion. I cant think of any examples in any other sport where that happens with the regualrity it has in orienteering. I dont think that does the sport any favours.

Also think its a bit harsh to keep the onus for complaining on the fellow competitors. If its clear the planner or organiser has cocked up they should own up/apologise and look for a solution - and not have to wait for someone to complain.

Voiding a championship race happens every now and then in Sweden too for various reasons. Usually there´s no heated debate if the matter is clear cut - misplaced control or such. Rules are rules.
Since we have a slightly better geographical layout there´s usually also a possibility to appoint another meet as an opportunity to re-run the race (i.e. not the same courses) at a later date.

The problem here (in Georgia) doesn´t seem to be if the control was misplaced or not - everyone agrees it was - then it´s really a clear case --> course should be voided! And that can (should?) actually be done even without any single runner "complaining/protesting" as soon as meet officials find out about it. If anyone doesn´t like that decision THEN it´s time to protest, but it will be hard to find room in the rules to NOT void the course.

@bshields - I don't disagree that some action is appropriate. But the way things are set up now, a successful protest for Francis means taking a medal away from Bob, and has no particular impact on whoever it was that made the error. The message is weak. (If the option were there to throw out just the offending leg, the message would be weaker still.)

"Meaningless medals" is a complicated can of worms, by the way. I can come up with reasons why all of my championship medals are hollow and insignficant, starting with the list of people who could have beaten me but didn't show up. Bob may well have beaten Francis handily even if the control were fine. There may be a flaw in the scientific process, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the results are "screwed up".

I still think you're pussy-footing around.

I don't understand. My main point is that I can understand why, when Francis had the opportunity to protest, he just shrugged and said "Why bother?". That was apparently also the case for everybody else on Brown. With the system the way it is right now, a misplaced control causes a course to be thrown out only if somebody protests, and with a standalone race, there doesn't appear to be enough motivation for anyone to do so. The rules were devised back when almost all A-meets, including championships, were two-day affairs. (I will observe that my comment on the effect of throwing out a single leg could also be applied to the effect of throwing out one day of a two-day race.)

I'm not taking a stand, here. I'm just observing that the rules that are in place aren't having the effect that I think a lot of people would want them to have.

"pussy-footing around"?

Indeed. More so recently than normal.

By the way, it was pointed out to me that I was looking at the wrong results list -- on the day in question, Francis was in 5th place, behind Dennis, Bob, Bill, and Jim, and it was reasonably close -- the amount of time that AP thinks Francis lost on control #6 was slightly more than the amount he was behind the leader.

I'm not saying that the course shouldn't have been thrown out. From what I can see, it should have been. But nobody protested, so it wasn't, despite the fact that 21 out of 56 finishers lost time on that leg. And I'm guessing that it was because they saw no benefit to doing so.

The awarded medals are not meaningless; although, they may not be as meaningful. The competitors are all innocent bystanders in this debate. I don't think I can improve the situation by nullification - which is a reason to not have protested.

Also, my run is evidence that single control removal is bogus. Look at my fastest legs: I blundered into #3 (apparently not knowing any better); and, #7 after all the rest I got at #6.

The bone I have to pick is with the organizers - and maybe OUSA for awarding these events to underpowered clubs. Like Syracuse, I suspect that Georgia did not devote enough resources to proper vetting. So, this stuff slips through.

It is very sad that during last 2 years at USA championship events the course/map success rate is 50%.

2011 Classic Champs - excellent map, courses voided due to misplaced and missed controls. -1
2011 SML Champs - excellent maps and courses. +1
2012 Classic Champs - didn't attend but heard map was ok and no complaining about courses. +1
2012 SML Champs - maps not to standards, misplaced controls on long courses (red and brown). -1

I am not sure how to improve this more than alarming sutuation in the USA orienteering. May be I need to start charging organizers for my travel costs approaching $1000/event.

I think it takes a high degree of orienteering skill to recognize that a control is misplaced. If it is misplaced, don't search around and hope to get lucky. Skip it and protest. If the protest is upheld, then the winner should be those with the fastest times who skipped that control. Totally bizarre idea, but what the heck I'll throw it out there for shredding.

I am still waiting for an apology from course setter / meet director, that would make things much better, otherwise does not look good on their side, ...or may be they do not read AP.

Greg, don't be so naive. Map and courses--such an insignificant stuff.

I went to GAOC yahoo group to see what they are thinking.
Celebration is underway. I am quoting what I read there (and there is nothing of opposite view):

"Fabulous wonderful event!" (GAOC member)
"It seemed to be a huge success" (GAOC member)
"Thanks to all in the GAOC for an outstanding US Champs" (GAOC member)

Next one is my favorite:

"Thanks to the Course Design Team! … Hope everybody had a good time!" (Sam Smith)

"Thank you all for making our A-Meet a success!" (Event Director)
"Wow! What an event!! … I believe this was the best event yet!" (GAOC member, a member of course-setting team)

and finally, get loaded to this:

"As a Novel Event, it was truly EPIC!... this one truly set a new standard in so many ways" (President of GAOC)

Distant observer with a question
Why do you still have a classic championship? Its a bit like running mile championships in athletics.
If the problem is not enough clubs with the scale and energy to pull off all the big events on your calendar, there seems an obvious solution.

@jj - I guess misunderstood your remarks. It sounded to me like you were in favor of awarding medals over voiding the course.

There is still a substantial number of orienteers here who prefer the classic format (or at very least strongly oppose any attempt to discontinue it). As long as there is a significant market willing to pay to participate in such event, why waste time and energy trying to eliminate it? You would only alienate some of OUSA's biggest financial and organizational supporters. There is plenty of room for both a two day classic and the IOF standard events.

OK, with all due respect, you Russians need to get over your high and mighty selves. You are coming across as rather petty.

What do you want? For the people of GAOC to put on their hairshirts and visit the stations of the cross for the next five years? To lock themselves in a dungeon and flagellate one another with compass lanyards?

Do you want a personal engraved apology or would only a mea culpa in the New York Times suffice?

I am a pretty fastidious person--maybe more than you can begin to appreciate--but I'm also realistic. This is just silly.

Come on, J-man, let us have some fun. Just like we tolerate that juvenile Chuck Norris stuff.
I know the subject. Live and work here for many years. And seeing it IS embarrassing, not just for you, for me as well. Here is a story : a year ago I was unable to explain to Director of a local meet in GA that asking people to copy from master map ON THE CLOCK is against the spirit of this sport, that it does not belong to orienteering. Heard that time, as many times before, “Here we are doing it our own Southern way”. Or you think I never told them that mapping—and then using for controls—some rotten 30 cm high rootstocks --is not such a smart idea?
Of course no hara-kiri is expected. Just some sober analysis and account of what went wrong and for what reason. The issue with Model was just clarified.

Aren't Balter and yurets both from Ukraine?

Balter seems to want to forget his Ukrainian heritage. Everytime I bring up Odessa, he wants nothing to do with it. Hmm.

I agree that he doesn't consider himself to be a Ukranian, but neither a Russian. When I asked him once what he considered himself, he gave a completely reasonable answer: "A Jew".

Catholic Jew or Protestant Jew?

I didn't know they had Jews on his planet? I always thought he was the first of his kind.

Yes, it is true. Yurets has "lived and worked in Georgia for many years", but he has never assisted with a meet. GAOC welcomes volunteers, especially runners who know IOF rules. GAOC could have used some knowledgable volunteers during the A-meet.

you Russians

That would be entirely me! ... ouch.

"As a Novel Event, it was truly EPIC!... this one truly set a new standard in so many ways"

But it did. It was very well organized in almost all non-course/map aspects, and there were bright spots on the latter front as well. If there are steps forward in some areas, indeed a good post-event course of thinking would be to try to take all the things that went well/were new and good, and communicate them to the next set of organizers. This next set will surely be able to figure out how to get all these pesky map and course details right...

@ndobbs

"Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes"

Here is a list of thing for future USA championship organizers to work on:

1. Get well recognized professional mapper to work on areas of interest.
2. Get well recognized course consultant (like Erik W.) to help with course layouts and details.
3. Sign well recognized experienced course setters to design and put courses.
4. Get very experienced vetters to check at least 3 times all control locations. Tape all control locations with appropriate markings.
5. Print maps with final courses at appropriate scales, ex. 1:15000 (1:10000 if warranted or middle) for elites, 1:10000 for M/F40+ and M/F18-, 1:4000/1:5000 for sprints. Do not ever give 1:15000 maps to older or young competitors!
6. Print all clue sheets at appropriate readable sizes (sic!). Provide clue sheets at start areas (sic!) independently of the fact that you put copies in competitor packets.
7. Use appropriate sealed map plastic bags (sic!).
8. Synchronize all SI units, especially used for start and finish.
9. At day of competition put all controls with bags, punches, SI units in advance.
10. Have early pre-runners to check ALL control placements and SI units and finish units. Delay starts if neccessary to fix problems.
11. Do not try to make it cheap at all costs! Do not save on quality of courses and maps!

Follow these simple steps and positive karma will be always with you.

BTW, my origins are Ukranian too :)

May be we need to start new discussion and bring plethora of advise from AP comminuty to future USA Championship / International event organizers?

BTW, this list above is almost a repeat of the same given after 2011 USA Classic event.

12. Charge $45/race/person.

4. Get very experienced vetters to check at least 3 times all control locations

Better: Have your maps properly georeferenced, and have a rule that no course-work-related person ever goes out without a GPS. Download all GPS tracks promptly, and examine them for funkiness.

I believe this procedure would have avoided the Brown course problem on the Long day of the Champs. Out of curiosity, Mike went out there the night before and inspected the WRE courses, but I believe hearing about the potential Brown issue early as well. If Mike saw it on Friday, was it too late to fix/deemed not possible to fix?

@Hammer

We are almost there :) From Champs site
Adults $35 ($31) $45 ($41) $45 ($41) $45 ($41)
Juniors $30 ($28) $40 ($38) $40 ($38) $40 ($38)

While they did have issues with some of these, I don't think it is fair to say that all of these were issues at this meet.

1. Get well recognized professional mapper to work on areas of interest.
2. Get well recognized course consultant (like Erik W.) to help with course layouts and details.
3. Sign well recognized experienced course setters to design and put courses.
4. Get very experienced vetters to check at least 3 times all control locations. Tape all control locations with appropriate markings.
5. Print maps with final courses at appropriate scales, ex. 1:15000 (1:10000 if warranted or middle) for elites, 1:10000 for M/F40+ and M/F18-, 1:4000/1:5000 for sprints. Do not ever give 1:15000 maps to older or young competitors!

Its not really up to the meet what scale the maps are printed. Rules are 1:15000 for all long courses, and and variation of that needs to be approved by sanctioning.

6. Print all clue sheets at appropriate readable sizes (sic!). Provide clue sheets at start areas (sic!) independently of the fact that you put copies in competitor packets.
7. Use appropriate sealed map plastic bags (sic!).

It was an interesting choice in the use of ziploc bags. Is that a regional thing? I would guess that they are more expensive than regular sealed map bags.

8. Synchronize all SI units, especially used for start and finish.

I don't think they had any issues with synchronization. We had the SI Master in the results area and were also using it to sync all the computers and radios each day.

9. At day of competition put all controls with bags, punches, SI units in advance.

I believe they had everything except start/finish out at least the night before for the long and middle.

10. Have early pre-runners to check ALL control placements and SI units and finish units. Delay starts if neccessary to fix problems.

There were pre runners that ran zones of controls each day and did a download to check that they were all there. It would be best for them to also carry extra SI boxes to fix any problems immediately. Not sure if that was done.

11. Do not try to make it cheap at all costs! Do not save on quality of courses and maps!

What decisions do you think were made to save money? The maps were laser printed, and while I think the paper was too bright, and the toner too shiny, the colors and resolution were fine. They did have a club member (Sam) make the maps, but he is a known mapper in the area, having done a number of GAOCs maps. The solution can't always be to bring in european mappers. We need to be developing more domestic mappers. Telling them they suck on AP is not the way to encourage them to learn from the experience and get better, it just makes people give up.

I think they made two mistakes on the maps/courses. Having the mapper also be course setter I don't think is a good idea for a meet like this. The course setter should have a semi adversarial relationship with the mapper when it comes to verifying control locations. If the course setter doesn't agree with the mapper in an area, he then has the opportunity to not use that area. If they are the same person, they always agree. The other mistake was in the basemap. There is lidar for the area, but they didn't have it processed well into a good set of products. I think they just went with the existing 3m contours generated by the county. If you need GIS work done, don't just muddle though it yourself, ask for help! There are people around that enjoy that aspect of mapping and will make it a lot easier down the road.

It is very sad that during last 2 years at USA championship events the course/map success rate is 50%.

And go back to the previous SML in 2010 for another "-1". A misplaced WHITE(/Yellow) SPRINT control capped off an awful weekend.

Ed, I started a new discusion for future USA Champs organizers. Could you, please, add your thoughts in there?

The list above is generated based on the last 2-3 years of USA Champs experience so not everything may be applied to this specific GAOC hosted event but is pretty typical across the "failed high expectations national championship events".

BTW, I am surprised that last weekend early pre-runners didn't notice misplaced controls on long courses.

Speaking about developing mappers I don't think that USA Championship map making is appropriate way to raise local mappers. Competitors first mappers second.

ed said "...We need to be developing more domestic mappers. Telling them they suck on AP is not the way to encourage them ..."

If a mapper suck - he or she suck. I will never race again on maps created by Sam Smith the mapper. Sorry!

From domestic mappers currently in the USA only Mark Dominie and Mikell Platt are qualified to create championship event maps.

And I guess Mikell and Mark just popped out of thin air as championship-quality mappers?

(Mark was the mapper for the 2011 US Classic Champs and the 2009 Ultralong Champs, for instance.)

Luckily their maps never sucked, else you'd be out of luck.

@j-man "you-Russians" comment surprises me as degrading, I am an American Citizen, just like you are. I am not looking for personal apology, I do not deserve one, but all people on Brown course do. A simple statement like that: "After careful investigation we realize that control #6 on a brown course during Long Course Championship on Saturday was misplaced / mispapped. We apologize to all participants, and appreciate the fact that no-one protested the course, spearing our great volunteer crew public humiliation."
I would shot-up and would come to next GAOC event with no reservation.

I am an American Citizen, just like you are.

I am so thankful that you are on our side. Our enemies would be unstoppable if they had the Balter.

I can name some other US mappers who are quite capable of producing championship quality maps, although you'd have a hard time persuading them to sign on to such a project. (You wouldn't have much luck getting Swampfox to work on a map that he couldn't get to on foot from his house these days, either.)

j-man is presumably a Scot, right?

I stand by my comments, and am glad the ever so deliberate construction of my comments got your attention.

Peter the Great, Nabokov, Solovyov, and Tolstoy are Russian. Roseanne Barr, Sarah Palin, Clem McGrath, Howard Stern, and apparently Gregory Balter are American Citizens.

Our actions degrade us, not the accident of our birth or the country on our passport.

Oh, and I think we should leave NAOC out of this.

You asked, I did :)

... "all people on Brown course do."
Hold on a minute Balter. I ran the brown course in question and I don't feel I deserve an apology so don't presume to speak for me.
I will concede that the two controls - #3 and #6 were not in the center of the circles but they had to be visible from the center of the circle. #6 was no more than 30 or so metres away in very open woods and flat terrain. I think most of the problems at # 6 would have been caused by pace counting issues causing runners to overshoot the area of the control or come up short. In a case like that one wouldn't know whether to keep going, turn left, right or around.
#3 most sensible orienteers would be off aiming to the left (uphill) side so a turn to the right and on to the control was natural.
PS I just hate this dissing of persons on the basis of their country of origin. Can we put it aside?

Yeah, j-man, we know how much you hate Russians.

You know me; I am a true bigot.

If there are often quality problems at championship events I wonder if there is a system problem. Around here the quality control is the responsibility of a person called the "controller". The federation runs training and certification of controllers. The planner may well be the mapper but it is the controller who is charged with overseeing everything, from the event documentation to the course lengths and difficulty to the location of the controls. This is the independent set of eyes. "The buck stops here." I have the feeling that OUSA may not have such a strong role.

This system is not a guarantee, there were problems with the national sprint championship recently. There was a complaint, it went to protest, a jury agreed there were mapping errors (and implicitly course errors) but declined to void the class. There is IOF guidance on the circumstances for voiding. There is discussion about the jury decision (should it have voided?) but the process is working - the mapper, planner and controller have been given the message. More importantly problems like this are rare.

Bases on opinions voiced in a separate thread:
http://attackpoint.org/discussionthread.jsp/messag...
I have to apologize to all people I may have offended above, I love orienteering as much you do, sometimes I get carried away with emotions. It is time to move on, at least for me.

Speaking about mappers, person who made bulk of recent maps for OCIN events, IMO, is more than qualified. No doubt he would have made it right in GA. However this club is not willing to pay to mappers, but relies on volunteers. We’ve seen the results. BTW, Plamen Diambazov as well will do, based on his Masters World Champs 1997 work. His Telemark maps were not to that level, but I’ve heard he was called in the last moment to correct work screwed up by someone else.Indeed, situation with mappers is gloomy. Time of cheap “visitors” from Eastern Europe is over.

j-man is presumably a Scot, right?
I'm hoping that was a compliment...

Of course. As is the case with any ethnic, racial, national, or regional group. Except for the ambiguity surrounding the word "Yankee", the meaning of which varies depending on who is using it.

@jj
Is "Commie" a compliment? I think this one is the last officially allowed target

If the course setter doesn't agree with the mapper in an area, he then has the opportunity to not use that area. If they are the same person, they always agree.

Ugh. If that were true, that's just dishonesty on the part of the mapper/course setter - if you're not willing to critically evaluate your own work, what the hell are you doing mapping?

@yurets -- "commie" is only an insult in the minds of about half of the people in the political spectrum. The ones that are universally insulting are "fascist" and "nazi", but that gets into the realm of Godwin's Law. And those aren't groupings about where someone is from anyway, they're about attitude.

@jj+grame--I just decided to let that one slide.

Criticisims have gone way over the top here. This thread would never have started had controls been properly placed and people had not wondered why there was no protest. Unfortunately, through all this discussion there is no cogent reason that appears to support a protest. I just don't buy the idea that just because only some people 'died' in the mistake that we should go back and 'shoot' the rest to make a point. And, while I generally agree with Gord's comments, I think he understates the problem.

First, without the misplaced controls there may have been grumbling; but, I agree with Peter, otherwise the controls were findable. There was a lot to like in the event - venues, reporting, even the terrain and courses. It is the misplaced controls that are inexcusable because of the drastic effect it has on a competition or a championship. In business it would be considered at least misfeasance and possibly malfeasance. An OUSA course consultant would never pick this up and the apparent fact that Mike (IOF) actually looked at #73 in the field is both unusual and unexpected. Misplaced controls are the direct responsibility of the organizers.

So, Ed's list of things unfortunately obfuscates his #4 - vetting. Proper vetting would have turned up the issues early enough to get them right - maybe even fixing the map in important locales. However, three guys looking at the controls ad hoc isn't enough. What is necessary is a system of vetting. An analog exists in software development where there are code makers and code breakers - the latter's job it is to torture the former's code to get it to reveal weaknesses. This adversarial relationship should be friendly because it is the vetter's job to make the setter look good. And, the setter should want all the complaints on the table before the event starts - no surprises. Misplaced controls, among other things, do not make a course setter look good.

This event only had two sets if eyes (+Mike), the mapper/course designer, and the vetter. Sanctioning should be sure to require at least three different, and competent, people on future applications.

@francish
Could you, please, summarize your constructive comments on another thread titled "AP Community advises to future USA..."? I think it is nice to have it at one place not buried among other comments. Thanks, Sergey