Forum   |   Links    


Forum Home   Start New Topic   Edit Profile   Register  

1   2   3   4  

Big Rogaines

Show Profile  Hamish Posted: 12 June 2008, 9:35 AM  
I wouldn't call #83 'tricky'. We took an hour and 38 minutes to locate it.
Putting on a rogaine is a big effort (and much appreciated) and I personally don't think an area should be really well remapped, just tidied up where it's going to make a big difference. I go into every rogaine expecting the map not to be perfect and the odd control a bit off. Most of the time it's a correct assumption.

Show Profile  Old Timer Posted: 12 June 2008, 10:05 AM  
Here's some interesting things...

Several folk at the NZ Rogaine Champs said we should have made some of the Controls a bit harder (navigationally) for more "challenge".

Some are saying Control #83 was too hard / misplaced, despite at least 55 teams getting it.

I have at home 95% of all the Rogaine Maps used in New Zealand since 1990. I would safely say that the NZ Rogaine Champs Map this year was at least as good, if not better - accuracy wise - than any of them (although the 1985 Waiouru Mountain Marathon map was the best long-distance event map I have seen).

Only a small proportion of the comments here come from people who have actually prepared a 12-24 hour Rogaine Map.

The moral/s? We (and that includes me) are a fickle bunch.

Show Profile  rob.g Posted: 12 June 2008, 10:44 AM  
The map was superb to read with a lightening of the green and blown up to 1:40000.

I never went to control 83, but too many people had trouble for it to have been totally fair. It's a case of course setters getting to the planned point, and finding the site unsuitable and then need to change to a better site. Just as in orienteering where the map is not correct you need to move elsewhere. It was certainly a vague(dangerous looking) site.

The map was not difficult because it had heaps of detail like fences and most vegetation changes shown, so more difficult sites were not an option.

The gorse issue was in most of the forest areas, and we soon learnt to take no risks, especially near streams, but I don't believe it needed map updates as it was really patchy in some places or really obvious.

Show Profile  Hamish Posted: 12 June 2008, 12:09 PM  
Totally agree with both of you. The map (and event) was really good.
In fact we kept commenting on the way round how accurate the map was.

Show Profile  pete s Posted: 12 June 2008, 7:27 PM  
Hey, nice one Hamish - that made me chuckle - you spent almost as long on control 83 as you have done on some orienteering controls! (ouch, sorry mate - you know I'm just pulling your leg! :-) )

Completely agree with Rob and Hamish about the event being good - and I ain't knocking anyone for the issues we experienced, cause I can well appreciate the efforts involved in putting events like this on, and Mark, Lance and co did a brilliant job. That said, lets not ignore any learning - this ain't personal, just some comments from someone who experienced the event - I believe (like Rob) that control 83 was not in a clever place (broad spur, no clear catching features, on a 1:40k map), and I'd argue it was not in the right place either (having measured the distance and then paced it in, and worked 100 metres either side of the spot it was meant to be in).

As said before though, bloody good event, and thanks again Lance/Mark - all good fun and a memorable event!




1   2   3   4  

Ruffneck Productions © Ruffneck Productions