Training Log Archive: cedarcreekIn the 7 days ending Oct 27, 2006:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| « | » |
| » now | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Sa | Su | Mo | Tu | We | Th | Fr | |||||||
Sunday Oct 22, 2006 #
Orienteering race 1:34:08 [4] *** 4.64 km (20:17 / km) +240m 16:07 / km
spiked:5/12c shoes: Adidas $42 Cleats
Green course at Germantown Metropark West (MVOC), west of Dayton.
I have a love-hate relationship with this map. I never know when to trust it. I think the vegetation mapping is sub-par. Rough Open fields look so inviting, but when I go through them I think they need some greenbar added.
The legs were really interesting, with a lot of route choice and some difficult map reading along the way. Almost a middle, when you combine the course with the dodgy vegetation. I feel sorry for less experienced advanced runners today. If you knew you were right, it wasn't too bad.
My biggest problem was looking at a leg and thinking, "If I could trust the map, this is how I'd go." And then I'd think, "Can I trust the vegetation? --- No." And then I'd make my mistake. I'd ignore my knowledge of the bad vegetation, and I'd trust the map. It's almost passive-aggressive: "You want me to do WHAT? Okay, I'll show you how stupid that is."
I've said the legs were really interesting, and that's usually my standard for judging a course, but the problem today was that there were so many similar legs that it was monotonous. It seemed like most legs were from one hilltop to another, with some complicated map reading in between. It's a difficult place to set courses, but one longer leg would have been nice, as would a control picking section on some complicated but flattish section.
Specific complaints:
111 was bingoish. A little too hidden for control number 1, particularly for newer advanced competitors.
137 was mapped in white, but actually in green. I'd had a lot of trouble making sense of the contours here. I was following a bearing and skirting the green, and had two solid reasons to keep moving, and maybe two solid reasons to turn around and check the green behind me. The map didn't support the control here.
207-274: The rough open field wasn't. I didn't waste a lot of time, but if I knew I'd be running along a road that long, I would've taken a different route for practice.
219: I approached from the stream, and the contours weren't making sense. If you stand where you can see the earth bank, and try to figure out why the map shows a gentle reentrant, and the land shows two, and the rock is supposed to be on the top of the steep section, not on the terrace on top, it just adds up to something being wrong.
264 was perfectly placed with respect to the trail bend, but I had seemingly unmapped shallow reentrants on either side as I approached it. I saw it from far off, so I wasn't too concerned, but the map is just screwy.
110-GO is not a good leg design. I did basically the same leg backwards the first time I was on this map, and to me, as a course setter, this leg says it's okay to go straight. So I did it straight last time, and I could have walked the trail around and beat my time. I was climbing out of the reentrant in a steep ditch with a stream bed with layers of rock that were like stairs. The only thing a course setter can say to a leg like this is, "You should have known better than to go straight." That works for green vegetation, but not for dangerously steep reentrants like this. The young people especially go straight, and here, someone could get hurt.
I don't want to be too critical, because I did like the course, and I really had a good time. I'll admit it's a really difficult map to set courses on, and it was some pretty serious orienteering.
Addendum: 265 (Boulder) was pretty well hidden. The bag was low, behind a log, with bag-colored leaves all around. I'm not complaining about it, but I did say a dirty word when I saw the bag. This is why I like bags with blue on them, and control stands.
I have a love-hate relationship with this map. I never know when to trust it. I think the vegetation mapping is sub-par. Rough Open fields look so inviting, but when I go through them I think they need some greenbar added.
The legs were really interesting, with a lot of route choice and some difficult map reading along the way. Almost a middle, when you combine the course with the dodgy vegetation. I feel sorry for less experienced advanced runners today. If you knew you were right, it wasn't too bad.
My biggest problem was looking at a leg and thinking, "If I could trust the map, this is how I'd go." And then I'd think, "Can I trust the vegetation? --- No." And then I'd make my mistake. I'd ignore my knowledge of the bad vegetation, and I'd trust the map. It's almost passive-aggressive: "You want me to do WHAT? Okay, I'll show you how stupid that is."
I've said the legs were really interesting, and that's usually my standard for judging a course, but the problem today was that there were so many similar legs that it was monotonous. It seemed like most legs were from one hilltop to another, with some complicated map reading in between. It's a difficult place to set courses, but one longer leg would have been nice, as would a control picking section on some complicated but flattish section.
Specific complaints:
111 was bingoish. A little too hidden for control number 1, particularly for newer advanced competitors.
137 was mapped in white, but actually in green. I'd had a lot of trouble making sense of the contours here. I was following a bearing and skirting the green, and had two solid reasons to keep moving, and maybe two solid reasons to turn around and check the green behind me. The map didn't support the control here.
207-274: The rough open field wasn't. I didn't waste a lot of time, but if I knew I'd be running along a road that long, I would've taken a different route for practice.
219: I approached from the stream, and the contours weren't making sense. If you stand where you can see the earth bank, and try to figure out why the map shows a gentle reentrant, and the land shows two, and the rock is supposed to be on the top of the steep section, not on the terrace on top, it just adds up to something being wrong.
264 was perfectly placed with respect to the trail bend, but I had seemingly unmapped shallow reentrants on either side as I approached it. I saw it from far off, so I wasn't too concerned, but the map is just screwy.
110-GO is not a good leg design. I did basically the same leg backwards the first time I was on this map, and to me, as a course setter, this leg says it's okay to go straight. So I did it straight last time, and I could have walked the trail around and beat my time. I was climbing out of the reentrant in a steep ditch with a stream bed with layers of rock that were like stairs. The only thing a course setter can say to a leg like this is, "You should have known better than to go straight." That works for green vegetation, but not for dangerously steep reentrants like this. The young people especially go straight, and here, someone could get hurt.
I don't want to be too critical, because I did like the course, and I really had a good time. I'll admit it's a really difficult map to set courses on, and it was some pretty serious orienteering.
Addendum: 265 (Boulder) was pretty well hidden. The bag was low, behind a log, with bag-colored leaves all around. I'm not complaining about it, but I did say a dirty word when I saw the bag. This is why I like bags with blue on them, and control stands.
Note
Dec 18, 2006 Update:
I shouldn't have used the word "bingo-ish" for 111. It was a difficult placement, particularly for a first control, but it was where it should have been, and the map supported it. It was also a dogleg, but I don't worry too much about that on a local event, where there are so few people that it's unlikely to be a problem.
I shouldn't have used the word "bingo-ish" for 111. It was a difficult placement, particularly for a first control, but it was where it should have been, and the map supported it. It was also a dogleg, but I don't worry too much about that on a local event, where there are so few people that it's unlikely to be a problem.