Discussion: Control Description for Sprint

I have recently run across the problem of wanting to define a control to be on the side of some 'olive green' also known as a forbidden area. In this case it is usually a planted garden. When looking at the control descriptions I cannot find a very suitable one (I am thinking thicket or veg boundary). Looking at other orienteering courses it seems that people have been trying to define it as being on the cement near there (which only works when it is a corner), or on a bounding feature such as a fence (in this case most small bounding items have not been mapped).

What have other people used as a suitable control description?

As we all know, there are a finite number of control descriptions. And not every feature can be uniquely and adequately identified with them.

IMO if even one sprint runner pauses for a WTF moment when he's inside the circle, it isn't a fair control. So my solution has sometimes (sadly) been to select another nearby, more easily-described feature, in the interest of fairness.

I would go by the appearance. You're proposing thicket or veg boundary, and I'm assuming because those two most closely approximate the appearance. If it were low vegetation or an area competitors obviously shouldn't be crossing, like ornamental scattered tall bushes, I'd use veg boundary. If it were a hedge appearance, thicket would make sense to me.

Just a little off-topic rant: It really bothers me that the meaning of yellow-green changes between the ISOM and the ISSOM (ISOM "settlement", ISSOM "Area with forbidden access"), especially for the idea of a dangerous area. For an area where there really is a dangerous area, I'd feel legally and morally obligated to use the ISOM cross-hatch overprint symbol on a sprint map.

I wonder about using the "X" or "O" descriptor?

Sounds like a veg boundary in this case.

If the boundary between the olive and yellow is not clear in the terrain (like a private lawn merging into field), then it's probably not an appropriate location.

I like the WTF rule of thumb.

I'd soften the WTF language---"if even one" is ridiculously strict.

Perhaps 5+? years ago the control descriptions underwent a thorough revision. One of the key principles was to provide a direct relationship between map symbols and the "feature" column in the control description symbols. There are a finite number in both symbol sets and some categories of map symbols are combined in the control descriptions (different grades of thickets, marshes, cliffs...)

The guiding principle is that "feature" symbol should correspond directly to the symbol shown on the map, regardlees of appearance. The primary purpose of the "feature" column is to tell the orienteer on which map feature the control is located, not what the feature looks like. If the appearance of the control feature is different from the map symbol, then the the "appearance" column should be utilized.

This "puke green" /OB /garden symbol is the first symbol that I am aware of that may have slipped through the cracks. The authors might argue that this map symbol is not a real feature intended for a control, although I agree we have a reasonable case for using it. The veg bdry symbol sounds like the best intuitive option to me, even though this is intended to cover only the black dot and black line symbols.

This may be ass backwards, but do you have the option, and on site justification to add a veg bdry to the map? If so, I think this would cover you completely.

I would be very interested to hear one of the IOF authors address this one.

Here is an example. The planter, which in this case has two trees in it (and is about 5 feet wide?), is mapped using the olive-green. The small wall at its edge is not mapped, though the big one behind is.

corner of paved area at either end... although is the tree box even big enough to merit mapping?

"side of" anything isn't a particularly well-defined place.

I'm pretty certain I had this type feature at WOC2006 sprint qual. ( in the tivoli). I'll dig out the map

hammer>> Map with descriptions from WOC 2006 Sprint Final.There seems to be several examples of controls at "thickets" or veg boundaries.

Sprint Qualification map here - but no descriptions. Mike ran in Men C.

OK, just found my maps and I had this 'puke green' feature late in the race (not in the amusement park). It was code 44 and was marked in the description as a thicket. There is another example from a planter box earlier in the race. Code 48 in the amusement park (men's and women's qual A). Also had thicket as the description but puke green on the map. Unfortunately my scanner isn't working at the moment.

"side of" anything isn't a particularly well-defined place.

Maybe not - but in the case of sprints I suppose there are (too) many small objects where it really doesn´t matter which side you´re on since you will see the flag anyway and can often reach over if you end up on the wrong side.

"North side of boulder" seems pretty well-defined to me. For any point feature, I think it's not inappropriate.

Here is a WOC 2006 sprint qualification map with control descriptions showing control 44. Hm, seems "kind-of-okay". But "thicket" seems a little misleading, no? (The IOF definition of thicker: "A small area of forest where the tree cover or undergrowth is so dense that it is difficult to pass."). Maybe that is good enough for WOC, but I'm not sure that is up to the standards required at Barebones ;-) After all this I'm happier with the "O" symbol: "Special Symbol. If used, an explanation of its meaning must be supplied to competitors in the pre-race information.".

I should point out that the photo above is only an example of the type of feature. This particular planter is so small it isn't on the map, but it is otherwise quite similar to the feature in question (the mapper made me say that ;-)

Solution: buy one of these, map it, put a control there. Problem solved.

But the O and X symbol should only be used on the description if those are the symbols on the map, no?

Which bar in Whistler is that?

Well - I guess there is a precedent for using either thicket or veg boundary. In many cases it would be hard to define it as being on the cement, since there is no distinct feature like a corner.

AZ - for the photo I think you have the following options.

1. If the planter is mapped, it should be done so with a solid line separating pavement and olive green - therefore it is a vegetation boundary, no?. I don't think it's a special symbol
2. If this feature is not mapped, you can't put a control on it! It would read like a control circle hovering over a wall. That doesn't work for me. It would be like putting a control on an unmapped boulder and then having 0.5m boulder as your control desc.
3. You could choose the wall as your feature and description, but it looks like a linear feature (as opposed to a corner or end), so that is slightly sketchy too.

All in all, it's tough to say without seeing the map. Is it going to cause major confusion or be super tricky? I still like cedarcreek's WTF rule ;)

For the WOC 06 Control 44 - what did the feature look like in the terrain? If it was actually a thicket, then it sounds appropriate. If it was just a flower bed, then thicket seems a bit misleading to me.

As far as I'm concerned, the person who picked olive green as the symbol for out-of-bounds vegetation should be shot (figuratively, not literally). We already have 3 grades of green for vegetation ... using a 4th for not-allowed-to-cross vegetation is just stupid. As far as WTF moments, trying to separate small blobs/strips of olive-green from small blobs/strips of medium-green while running full speed in the middle of a sprint is right up there! [end rant]

Sorry, a little off topic wrt the original question, but looking at the 2006 WOC map just reminded me of how much I dislike this aspect of sprint orienteering.

That's chitownclark's WTF rule.

He wrote: IMO if even one sprint runner pauses for a WTF moment when he's inside the circle, it isn't a fair control.

My point is that sometimes a runner pauses because he or she has arrived inside the circle off-balance enough (figuratively) that they haven't read the map clearly. "Inside the circle" means 12-15m from the flag, depending on scale, and sometimes those WTF moments are just the runner running beyond his or her ability to read ahead.

2. If this feature is not mapped, you can't put a control on it! It would read like a control circle hovering over a wall.

This is a particular concern when it's an uncrossable wall, and there's no way to tell which side of it you need to be on.

I had written a similar comment to bmay earlier today about the olive green but elected not to send it but i agree puke green is no good in Both for isom and issom. Very hard to distinguish between the green and puke green on the Woc map from 2006. Why not a light pink for all out of bounds?

Cp44 was a flower bed I think.

Isn't there also a dark, dark green for uncrossable vegetation in ISSOM?

That's 5 shades of green on a sprint map:
light green
medium green
olive green
dark green
darkest uncrossable green

Well unlikely to be any green for England on Friday...

Glad to see the puke green symbol take a beating.
Also glad to hear bmay rant a little bit, which strikes me as a rarity :-) .

I always hated this symbol aesthetically, and always blamed the Swedes, who I believe gave birth to this symbol. I certainly agree with the more rational comments as well. However, I must admit I've gotten to like it for mapping small gardens, although they are of little consequence, except for the course setter.

I think the greater problem is its application in competition. It simply doesn't do a good job of defending critical OB areas. I think the current purple line symbol (dark pink? :-) ) does a better job of highlighting OB on the course map and should be used more often. This is to say nothing about the streamering and monitoring required to enforce OB especially in urban areas, but that's straying off topic even more.

Oh boy! I'm going in circles.

First is Pi with the idea that the "O" control description is intended to match special map symbols (and not just be a special control description). Okay - that actually sounds right.

Next is MrPither (who I will forgive for even thinking that I would allow a control on an unmapped feature or on anything that wasn't a "point" ;-). I think MrP is pressing me to accept "inside corner of paved area". Here's why:

a) first I don't think vegetation boundary works, because the IOF wording is that it is intended for a forest edge or vegetation boundary within the forest.
b) I'm not sure that there needs to be a solid line around the Puke Green. But in this case there actually is. And it is the "edge of paved area" line.

So if the control is at a corner of the Puke Green, then it is also on the corner of the paved area.

If this makes sense, then we are lucky that we aren't using a circular flower bed / planter ;-)

As for the original question. As a runner, I'd be happy enough with either:
i) vegetation boundary or
ii) thicket.
Even though it might not be "thick" by our normal forest definition, a flower bed is distinctly different from a paved area. Maybe in July the petunias will be dense enough to be considered "thick". If using the "thicket" option, make a mention of it in the meet notes. Veg boundary is certainly Ok, especially if there is a corner. I wouldn't worry about the IOF description limiting it to forest boundaries. We obviously have to adapt those definitions to sprint terrain. Vegetation boundary seems to match a wide variety of transitions - paved to grass, grass to flower bed, forest to more dense forest, etc. The actual transition will be obvious to the user who has a map in his/her hand. The key is that it should only be used if there is a clear transition from one type of vegetation to another - paved to flower bed certainly meets this criterion.

I would most definitely prefer it not be X or O (i.e., man-made feature) as that gives much less information than the established descriptions above. If the control description is X or O, then that's what I would expect to see on the map (not an area mapped with an established standard mapping symbol). Also, a man-made object is usually a point feature, not an area feature, so that would add further confusion.

hey AZ, CP 48 @ WOC2006 was a circular planter!

Okay - I reconsider my objection to the "Vegetation Boundary". Now I believe this is the most 'natural' description - if I was told a control was at 'vegetation boundary, NE corner', I don't think I'd be surprised to see the flower bed.

Thicket doesn't work for me because I'd be expecting a bunch of trees in that planter.

Because this is a highly visible control and not one of those tricky locations (ie. not under something or on the other side of an impassable wall, or on a different level, or obscured in anyway) I was debating using the circle with a dot in the middle, which is traditionally used for "Cairn", and giving it the new interpretation of "in the middle of the circle" ;-)

AZ I wasn't trying to push you in any one direction ;) Vegetation boundary seems most intuitive to me. I understand that may not be the intended purpose of the symbol, but it does seem to 'describe' the feature best.

I have always wondered how sprint maps would look and how would it work with all out-of-bounds objects drawn with purple. Purple line symbols (and point symbols?), areas with current color but purple border line. Purple fences, purple buiding edges, purple border line around ponds, purple walls and cliffs etc. It might look funny at first and it would be difficult to tell what something actually is (is purple line a wall or a flower bed), but would it matter in race use too much if you are not supposed to go through it anyway. And one would not have to start guessing about green shades or line widths, is this or that green dark enough or that black line thick enough.

It would be just ocad color & sybmol setup thing and one might easily change symbol set to print out normal colored maps for non racing use.

And maybe other purple shade for course, lighter purple for example. And using a purple dot in the center of the circle to pin point the accurate control location. And maybe even allowing control placing just anywhere, not only by mapped objects - purple dot and control flag should do. Some already place controls where ever they like by using artifical stones or similar setups, why bother, we already have control flags. And I believe that should not add risk for misplaced controls as much as it would do with normal O.

I love the ski-O "dot in the middle of the circle" idea. I find some course planners playing a game of "which side of the uncrossable fence" and I find that game a little frustrating. Why not make that information clear right on the map.

sometimes i can't exactly identify the different greens. diferrent map have different standard