Occassional thoughts about orienteering
|
|
| okansas.blogspot.com Occassional thoughts about orienteering |
|
|
Monday, October 14, 2002 Course setting in MichiganThe blue courses in Michigan were remarkably different. Two different people set the courses, so some differences are to be expected. But, my impression was that the two course setters had very different approaches to designing a course.The overall shape of the courses was different. On day one, we made a general counterclockwise loop around the map. On day two, the course looped over itself several times. The amount of terrain used each day was different. On day one, we used a fairly large portion of the map. But, on day two, the entire blue course fit in are area of less than 3 square kilometers (and the day two course was over one kilometer longer). The "pleasant-ness" of the terrain was different. On day one, we spent a fair amount of time in thorns and green. On day two, we spent much less time in thorns and much less time in green (though the woods were still fairly thick and we had options to run through some fairly dense marshes). One control on the first day involved forcing you're way through some fight at the edge of the map in a section of the map that was sketchy. From leaving the attackpoint (a junction between a trail and an erosion gully) to finding the control about 100 meters away, I took about ten minutes. I walked. I used a compass. I tried to read the contours. I had to bail out twice. I finally just began wandering and bumped into the control. The control placement was very different. On day one we had some markers that were hung so that it was tough to find the bag -- even when you got near the feature. On day two the controls were generally quite visible. The course setting trade-offs were different. On day one, we made a big loop around the map, but had a long road run to get around a big gravel put/concrete factory. There was only one way around the gravel pit -- along a dirt road. On day two we ran through a couple of areas more than once (the course crossed itself), but pretty much had to read the map the entire way. I preferred the day two courses. I should say, I preferred the day two courses much more. I think the difference in the courses reflect different ideas about the nature of our sport. The course setter for the first day likes orienteering to be about having a difficult time finding the marker. The course setter for the second day likes orienteering to be about making decisions throughout the race. I suspect that the day two course setter, Al Newman, began by looking at the terrain and picking the sections of the map he wanted to use. Then he probably designed a couple of longish legs with some interesting routes. He also saw a couple of areas that looked interesting -- in particular a flat area that was an abandoned golf course -- that he wanted to make sure the courses used. Finally, he looked for ways to connect the long legs and get the runners to go through the interesting areas. I think Al used the terrain quite well. I'll try to scan the course when I get home tonight and post it for all to see. posted by Michael | 1:17 PM 
Comments:
Post a Comment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||||
|
|||||
