Training Log Archive: JoshoshIn the 1 days ending Nov 2, 2014:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| « | » |
| » now | ||||
| |||||||
| Su |
Sunday Nov 2, 2014 #
12 PM
Cycling 1:35:24 [3] 36.62 km (2:36 / km) +616m 2:24 / km
shoes: Asics Gel Noosa Tri-9
No Orienteering so up to Molls gap and back on the bike. Headwind for the whole climb and got soaked too. Tricky enough downhill in the wet too.
(from the info i have, speaking to ruairi and zac and looking at zacs map, along with looking at the m16 course splits)
Zac was 3rd today, ~14mins down on rob pim. However rob was under 2mins on the split to control 12 a control that wasnt even on the map as was covered by the control descriptions and then roughly drawn on in blue pen to show the thickets, this control was also in the wrong place on a larger thicket to the NE or where the control was drawn on. Kev Cunningham also lost similar time here (over 16mins to this control, 14min loss). Some were informed at the start that this control was wrong, others werent, while others saw a kite and ran to it. In my opinion and i think many would agree, this control should be/have been taken out of the course in order to make it fair for everyone.I am not taking anything away from rob, who won with another solid performance and well done to him, im just saying that in the effort of fairness it should be a voided leg.
At control 11 Rob was 43:14, Zac was 44:32 and Ruairi was 44:44 (solid bunching in fairness to them). From control 12 (excluding the split to get to it as it should be voided) (also excluding the controls that didnt punch as it affected all 3 of them)
S-11
Rob: 43:14
Zac: 44:32
Ruairi: 44:44
From 12-F
Zac 21:25 (if you are reading this zac, awesome final third of the course buddy)
Rob 23:05
Ruairi 23:55
Without control 12 results would be and perhaps should be
Zac 65:57
Rob 66:19
Ruairi 68:39
Rant over, but would be interesting to see what others think in this scenario? Is it fair to have a control with no detail in the circle shown on the map with detail drawn in pen? And should a control be like that in a championship race?
(not sure if this control circle being blank affected other courses as it is dependent on positioning of the descriptions on the map)
(from the info i have, speaking to ruairi and zac and looking at zacs map, along with looking at the m16 course splits)
Zac was 3rd today, ~14mins down on rob pim. However rob was under 2mins on the split to control 12 a control that wasnt even on the map as was covered by the control descriptions and then roughly drawn on in blue pen to show the thickets, this control was also in the wrong place on a larger thicket to the NE or where the control was drawn on. Kev Cunningham also lost similar time here (over 16mins to this control, 14min loss). Some were informed at the start that this control was wrong, others werent, while others saw a kite and ran to it. In my opinion and i think many would agree, this control should be/have been taken out of the course in order to make it fair for everyone.I am not taking anything away from rob, who won with another solid performance and well done to him, im just saying that in the effort of fairness it should be a voided leg.
At control 11 Rob was 43:14, Zac was 44:32 and Ruairi was 44:44 (solid bunching in fairness to them). From control 12 (excluding the split to get to it as it should be voided) (also excluding the controls that didnt punch as it affected all 3 of them)
S-11
Rob: 43:14
Zac: 44:32
Ruairi: 44:44
From 12-F
Zac 21:25 (if you are reading this zac, awesome final third of the course buddy)
Rob 23:05
Ruairi 23:55
Without control 12 results would be and perhaps should be
Zac 65:57
Rob 66:19
Ruairi 68:39
Rant over, but would be interesting to see what others think in this scenario? Is it fair to have a control with no detail in the circle shown on the map with detail drawn in pen? And should a control be like that in a championship race?
(not sure if this control circle being blank affected other courses as it is dependent on positioning of the descriptions on the map)
C • 70 14