Discussion: BOK Summer Urban and Park League
in: Bristol
Jul 18, 2013 7:28 PM
#
BOK Summer Urban and Park League
Thoroughly enjoyed this series and would give many thanks to all the planner / organisers. I don’t think there is any doubt this was a great success. For me a step forward from the previous “informals.”
Last year wrote some comments, just to promote some discussion on changes/ improvements here are some more.
• For me 13 events was plenty – 10 would have been fine
• I quite liked one on a Sunday am and wondered if the last one could have had something extra e.g. social, beer, prize giving or some such.
• I had worried about returning to venues, whilst forests have multiple planning possibilities do streets? After a year’s gap returning to Coombe Dingle seemed to work.
• I did really enjoy the variation of the new venues if there is enthusiasm for more new maps next year let’s do it! (Thornbury, Clevedon, Emerson’s Green etc. trip off the tongue)
• Mixture of Park and Urban seemed to work. I was glad none were Score. (In the Winter SWOC run a monthly urban race as a 60 min (mass start?) score – we could use the new maps for something similar)
• Good attendances, lots of new/ planner organisers – including younger folk – ‘elite orienteers make good planners’
• Attendees contained a good proportion of younger/ more competitive runners
• Did not have large numbers of new runners.
• Planning of high standards
o For urban events planners need to check that for all seemingly viable routes uncrossable walls or settlements are clear on the map/ ground
o For urban events extra care needs to be taken for controls in woodland. Are they readily accessable through the undergrowth? (The answer to this can change in a couple of weeks). Is the map clear?
• Map printing – maps generally clear but ..
o Some funnies at Bath University – back lines on major paths on PC screenshot but not on final map
o Map of Sidcott deteriorated in the wet.
• Mapping
o Need small ‘cut throughs’ to be minimum width rather than as they are on the ground.
o Particularly for park areas is it worth having two map versions summer/ autumn & winter/ spring? (no idea how difficult/ practical this is)
• Selection of areas – in general some of BOKs areas are not really great for competition in summer due to bracken and bramble growth. Better to save these for the winter rather than task the planner with struggling to make fair/ pleasant. (I am suspicious that Burrington Ham might fall into this category but could not go so cannot really say)
1. Frenchay
o Lots of variety and the ‘cherry on the bun’ is the hospital. Could we get another race in before it closes – perhaps going S. down the Frome valley?
2. Coombe Dingle
3. Oldbury Court
4. Bath University
o Excellent sprint area –good enough for JK – glad we had a sprint format here. Still don’t know how I should have done legs through the multi- levels
5. Warmley Forest Park
o Very enjoyable - Legs longer than previous with plenty of choice
o Could be used as example of how to plan in this type of area
6. Sidcott School
o Loved innovation of using the school at the different scale. Modify the format to match area seems good mantra.
o I did think map could do with a polish. Some of the open did not look quite what I expected and alternative depictions in the school bridge and associated go/ no go could be clearer.
7. Ashton Court
o Really surprised & delighted to see new map
o Would 5m contours (& form lines) be better
o Might need whole park at 1;10,000 with standard symbols for some formats
8. Westbury on Trym
o Very much enjoyed this one –lots of variety
o Could mix and match with Coombe Dingle/ Henleaze.
o Control went missing in Clover Ground – this does seem to be an occasional snag with these type of races. Do we need some kind of etiquette that does not spoil the run.
9. Portishead
o Not the part of Portishead I was expecting (Lakegrounds/ Hill – perhaps another day?)
o Exceptional map
10. Burrington Ham
o Did not get to this one
11. Blaise Castle
o First chance to run on the OJ map – big thumbs up
o Good idea to designate a race as club champs but need to identify earlier
12. Long Ashton
o Did not get to this one
13. Bradley Stoke
o Quite different to previous race
o Lots of really interesting route choices
Thoroughly enjoyed this series and would give many thanks to all the planner / organisers. I don’t think there is any doubt this was a great success. For me a step forward from the previous “informals.”
Last year wrote some comments, just to promote some discussion on changes/ improvements here are some more.
• For me 13 events was plenty – 10 would have been fine
• I quite liked one on a Sunday am and wondered if the last one could have had something extra e.g. social, beer, prize giving or some such.
• I had worried about returning to venues, whilst forests have multiple planning possibilities do streets? After a year’s gap returning to Coombe Dingle seemed to work.
• I did really enjoy the variation of the new venues if there is enthusiasm for more new maps next year let’s do it! (Thornbury, Clevedon, Emerson’s Green etc. trip off the tongue)
• Mixture of Park and Urban seemed to work. I was glad none were Score. (In the Winter SWOC run a monthly urban race as a 60 min (mass start?) score – we could use the new maps for something similar)
• Good attendances, lots of new/ planner organisers – including younger folk – ‘elite orienteers make good planners’
• Attendees contained a good proportion of younger/ more competitive runners
• Did not have large numbers of new runners.
• Planning of high standards
o For urban events planners need to check that for all seemingly viable routes uncrossable walls or settlements are clear on the map/ ground
o For urban events extra care needs to be taken for controls in woodland. Are they readily accessable through the undergrowth? (The answer to this can change in a couple of weeks). Is the map clear?
• Map printing – maps generally clear but ..
o Some funnies at Bath University – back lines on major paths on PC screenshot but not on final map
o Map of Sidcott deteriorated in the wet.
• Mapping
o Need small ‘cut throughs’ to be minimum width rather than as they are on the ground.
o Particularly for park areas is it worth having two map versions summer/ autumn & winter/ spring? (no idea how difficult/ practical this is)
• Selection of areas – in general some of BOKs areas are not really great for competition in summer due to bracken and bramble growth. Better to save these for the winter rather than task the planner with struggling to make fair/ pleasant. (I am suspicious that Burrington Ham might fall into this category but could not go so cannot really say)
1. Frenchay
o Lots of variety and the ‘cherry on the bun’ is the hospital. Could we get another race in before it closes – perhaps going S. down the Frome valley?
2. Coombe Dingle
3. Oldbury Court
4. Bath University
o Excellent sprint area –good enough for JK – glad we had a sprint format here. Still don’t know how I should have done legs through the multi- levels
5. Warmley Forest Park
o Very enjoyable - Legs longer than previous with plenty of choice
o Could be used as example of how to plan in this type of area
6. Sidcott School
o Loved innovation of using the school at the different scale. Modify the format to match area seems good mantra.
o I did think map could do with a polish. Some of the open did not look quite what I expected and alternative depictions in the school bridge and associated go/ no go could be clearer.
7. Ashton Court
o Really surprised & delighted to see new map
o Would 5m contours (& form lines) be better
o Might need whole park at 1;10,000 with standard symbols for some formats
8. Westbury on Trym
o Very much enjoyed this one –lots of variety
o Could mix and match with Coombe Dingle/ Henleaze.
o Control went missing in Clover Ground – this does seem to be an occasional snag with these type of races. Do we need some kind of etiquette that does not spoil the run.
9. Portishead
o Not the part of Portishead I was expecting (Lakegrounds/ Hill – perhaps another day?)
o Exceptional map
10. Burrington Ham
o Did not get to this one
11. Blaise Castle
o First chance to run on the OJ map – big thumbs up
o Good idea to designate a race as club champs but need to identify earlier
12. Long Ashton
o Did not get to this one
13. Bradley Stoke
o Quite different to previous race
o Lots of really interesting route choices
Jul 18, 2013 8:40 PM
#
Really Good comments Charles! I agree with all of that!
I would also add that...
- I thought the compressed start slot was better for organisers and runners alike. It allows someone with a job to skive off a bit early and put out everything without taking holiday. At the end of the night, you can collect before dark. For compititors it creates a more social atmosphere, with nearly everyone crossing paths. The Britton's still managed to generally get split start in.
- Agree on the not many new comers point. Particuarly compared too previous years. I think the past 2 years, we had a nice flyer, and did quite a bit of promotion. This year was almost a different crowd, with some of the older members turning up for the first time.
-- We do need to be careful with maps. I put about 24 hours of field and catography into bradley stoke. I'm moderatly profiecient at OCAD. Achieved reasonble little, and there were still small mistakes and missing blocks. I would perfer a map was produced to a sufficent standard beforehand by either volunteers or paying people (students?) small amounts of money as incentives. Allowing planners just to plan. The risk with half baked maps is that they linger around for years to come.....
PS - Can I link this to the Club Facebook page? You might get more exposure.
I would also add that...
- I thought the compressed start slot was better for organisers and runners alike. It allows someone with a job to skive off a bit early and put out everything without taking holiday. At the end of the night, you can collect before dark. For compititors it creates a more social atmosphere, with nearly everyone crossing paths. The Britton's still managed to generally get split start in.
- Agree on the not many new comers point. Particuarly compared too previous years. I think the past 2 years, we had a nice flyer, and did quite a bit of promotion. This year was almost a different crowd, with some of the older members turning up for the first time.
-- We do need to be careful with maps. I put about 24 hours of field and catography into bradley stoke. I'm moderatly profiecient at OCAD. Achieved reasonble little, and there were still small mistakes and missing blocks. I would perfer a map was produced to a sufficent standard beforehand by either volunteers or paying people (students?) small amounts of money as incentives. Allowing planners just to plan. The risk with half baked maps is that they linger around for years to come.....
PS - Can I link this to the Club Facebook page? You might get more exposure.
This discussion thread is closed.