Discussion: Rocky Mountain O' Festival Day 2, One Cowgirl Relay
in: RMOC Rocky Mountain Orienteering Festival (Jun 29 – Jul 4, 2016 - Laramie, WY, US)
Jun 30, 2016 10:31 PM
#
Day 2, One Cowgirl Relay at Pitcher Hill, 5 loops, 6.9 kms, 17 controls.
Conditions: overcast, about 65F, occasional bits of sage (but only very occasional), overall very pleasant running.
As finishers accumulated, several runners pointed out that one control was erroneously described as being an 8 meter high boulder, when clearly it was closer to .8m--an apparent typo and error on the part of the course setter, a mistake to which the course setter quickly acceded to, throwing himself at the mercy of the horde. Fortunately no guillotines were at hand, and the horde was merciful.
Upon returning home, the course setter examined the description in the OCAD file, and determined that in the fact the height for the boulder in question had been correctly entered as .8m. So, it was then time for an examination of a printed map under magnification, which revealed the presence of 2 tiny dots, not touching, one of cyan and the other of magenta, where the decimal point should have appeared. Thus was the mystery unraveled--though of course the decimal point should have been large enough for the racers to see. Curiously, 2 other decimal points in heights for control descriptions on the same loop *were* visible to the naked eye.
It is really the story of organizing orienteering races in a nutshell: so many details to get right, and so many ways they can each be screwed up! ; )
Results:
1 Nick Barrable 40.58
2 Eric Bone 46.05
3 Alison Crocker 50.29
4 Ted Good 51.12
5 Mikhail Martemyanov 51.59
6 Aron Walker 55.01
7 Troy Bozarth 55.15
8 Ron Birks 55.23
9 Pete Curtis 55.47
10 Paul Pacque 55.53
11 Neal Barlow 56.11
11 Sarah-Jane Barrable 56.23
12 Bart Miller 56.41
13 Brian Moore 57.26
14 Tom Svobodny 58.29
15 Rick Breseman 59.22
16 Jason Poole 63.03
17 Ian Harding 63.09
18 Sverre Froyen 63.11
19 James Baker 68.31
20 Charlie Shahbazian 68.51
21 Natalia Deconescu 69.17
22 Aidan Minto 73.06
23 Tom Herrnstein 75.13
24 Quinn Bannister 77.14
25 Gavin Wyatt-Mair 77.32
26 Robert Gilchrist 77.59
27 David Waller 78.11
28 Michael Minium 78.47
29 Craig Weber 79.57
30 Leonid Shatskin 81.04
31 Chuck Spalding 81.26
32 Frank Skorina 81.47
33 Douglas Berling 81.51
34 Kris Beecroft 81.55
35 Steven Houghton 85.02
36 Sue Kuestner 85.03
37 Skyler Hertel 85.16
38 Mahlon Page 85.17
39 Thomas Murphy 85.29
40 Sam Listwak 85.38
41 Rob Wilkison 86.01
42 Thomas Allen 90.06
43 Rober Minto 90.11
44 Rick McBee 92.27
45 Jostein Grepstad 93.57
46 Peter Goodwin 94.32
47 Jim Hall 94.41
48 George Walker 96.42
49 Mark Parsons 97.44
50 B. Brooke Mann 98.27
51 Matthias Kohler 98.42
52 Lynette Walker 117.57
53 Donna Fluegel 118.05
54 Scott Drumm 118.25
Conditions: overcast, about 65F, occasional bits of sage (but only very occasional), overall very pleasant running.
As finishers accumulated, several runners pointed out that one control was erroneously described as being an 8 meter high boulder, when clearly it was closer to .8m--an apparent typo and error on the part of the course setter, a mistake to which the course setter quickly acceded to, throwing himself at the mercy of the horde. Fortunately no guillotines were at hand, and the horde was merciful.
Upon returning home, the course setter examined the description in the OCAD file, and determined that in the fact the height for the boulder in question had been correctly entered as .8m. So, it was then time for an examination of a printed map under magnification, which revealed the presence of 2 tiny dots, not touching, one of cyan and the other of magenta, where the decimal point should have appeared. Thus was the mystery unraveled--though of course the decimal point should have been large enough for the racers to see. Curiously, 2 other decimal points in heights for control descriptions on the same loop *were* visible to the naked eye.
It is really the story of organizing orienteering races in a nutshell: so many details to get right, and so many ways they can each be screwed up! ; )
Results:
1 Nick Barrable 40.58
2 Eric Bone 46.05
3 Alison Crocker 50.29
4 Ted Good 51.12
5 Mikhail Martemyanov 51.59
6 Aron Walker 55.01
7 Troy Bozarth 55.15
8 Ron Birks 55.23
9 Pete Curtis 55.47
10 Paul Pacque 55.53
11 Neal Barlow 56.11
11 Sarah-Jane Barrable 56.23
12 Bart Miller 56.41
13 Brian Moore 57.26
14 Tom Svobodny 58.29
15 Rick Breseman 59.22
16 Jason Poole 63.03
17 Ian Harding 63.09
18 Sverre Froyen 63.11
19 James Baker 68.31
20 Charlie Shahbazian 68.51
21 Natalia Deconescu 69.17
22 Aidan Minto 73.06
23 Tom Herrnstein 75.13
24 Quinn Bannister 77.14
25 Gavin Wyatt-Mair 77.32
26 Robert Gilchrist 77.59
27 David Waller 78.11
28 Michael Minium 78.47
29 Craig Weber 79.57
30 Leonid Shatskin 81.04
31 Chuck Spalding 81.26
32 Frank Skorina 81.47
33 Douglas Berling 81.51
34 Kris Beecroft 81.55
35 Steven Houghton 85.02
36 Sue Kuestner 85.03
37 Skyler Hertel 85.16
38 Mahlon Page 85.17
39 Thomas Murphy 85.29
40 Sam Listwak 85.38
41 Rob Wilkison 86.01
42 Thomas Allen 90.06
43 Rober Minto 90.11
44 Rick McBee 92.27
45 Jostein Grepstad 93.57
46 Peter Goodwin 94.32
47 Jim Hall 94.41
48 George Walker 96.42
49 Mark Parsons 97.44
50 B. Brooke Mann 98.27
51 Matthias Kohler 98.42
52 Lynette Walker 117.57
53 Donna Fluegel 118.05
54 Scott Drumm 118.25
Jun 30, 2016 10:45 PM
#
On the course, I couldn't tell if it was 8.0m or 0.8m. I figured if I would look for a 0.8m and if I saw a really tall boulder, adjust. It was easy to adjust to since I went to where the person in front of me just punched :)
When I do courses. I always use two digits (one before and one after the decimal point). so 0.8 is easier to read than .8. Since features are rarely over 10 meters I have never had 1.0m mistaken for 10m.
When I do courses. I always use two digits (one before and one after the decimal point). so 0.8 is easier to read than .8. Since features are rarely over 10 meters I have never had 1.0m mistaken for 10m.
Jun 30, 2016 10:56 PM
#
rm:
I set a course with a 15 metre boulder once. Surprisingly, due to all the hemlock, it wasn't visible from 50 Meyers away, despite gray visibility. +1 on writing 0.8 rather than. 8, but it was an amusing end to the course to be looking for an 8 meter boulder, real or fictitious. After the preceding control's 3.5m boulder, I was fully ready for the second to last control to be something monumental. Even though the rock wad less than advertised, the local historical museum and restored mansion that we visited lawyer in the afternoon was impressive; lots of lovely old artefacts, more than I expected.
Jul 1, 2016 3:03 AM
#
I was taught to always use the leading zero for this exact reason. Now that I think about it, I can think of only two professors who specifically mentioned why. It might be more obscure than I thought. On the other hand, I can't think of any engineering/math/science professors I've had who didn't use a leading zero. I know when someone uses a chalkboard without a leading zero, I'm always annoyed. I can hear the chalk going in circles to make a decimal point and then the tenths. Oh how I hate that.
Jul 5, 2016 12:57 AM
#
This discussion thread is closed.