COURSE SETTING

Course Setting

Course setting can be an intimidating task. It is time consuming, technically demanding and there is always the possibility of making a very public mistake. Setting Day 1 of the 2009 Australian 3 Days, held last Easter at Diddleum, Tasmania, was the first major event for both course setter and controller. This article has been compiled by Nigel Davies (Esk Valley Orienteering Club, Tasmania).

Ground rules

A friend used to design wilderness reserves as a palliative from his day job as a forester. He described the process as being both artistic and creative as he tried to endow each reserve its own qualities and values, supported by appropriate boundaries. Without wishing to be too precious about it, there is a similar element in creating an Orienteering course. The courses that tend to stick in your mind have the feeling of a journey – an ‘expedition’ – with a beginning, a middle and an end, each part with its own individuality and terrain. Two events that exemplified this for the writer were the courses for APOC 2000 at The Cascades, Queensland and for the World Masters 2002 at

Kooyoora, Victoria. Although Diddleum lacked the full-on, wild quality of these areas the first goal was to design courses that gave the feeling of a journey. In some respects the availability of SportIdent discourages this process as it is possible to design compact courses with

criss-crossing loops. This results in the runner re-crossing familiar territory and losing the discovery element of new territory. The second goal was that dead running should be minimised and every leg should pose a particular problem and require some sort of decision from the runner. A high intensity of decision making imprints a leg in the mind. After some courses it is possible to recall every leg clearly because every leg is different. If there is a sameness of terrain, leg length and decision making then the nature and sequence of legs begins to blur in the memory.

Course design

One year out from the event, three of us visited Diddleum and ran the entire map to get a feel for the terrain. This enabled us to identify a location for the event centre, approximate locations for the start and finish and a ‘shape’ for the courses. The longer courses all began with a descent into a Tolkienesque patch of plantation and rainforest, with small marshes, gullies, log piles, streams, rock and several ‘rides’. The rides (marked on the map as elongated dashed lines) were not a familiar feature to all runners. They are found more frequently in European forests where plantation forestry is more common. We felt that this area was similar to some Scottish orienteering terrain with the same challenge of detailed navigation in complex terrain but without the $5,000 airfare. The second stage (and the first stage for the shorter courses) was the open rough pasture, of the main valley. The challenge here was to resist the temptation to run too fast and lose touch amongst many similar marshes and drainage channels. For the aesthetically inclined the transition from plantation to pasture opened up a striking view of Mt Barrow at the head of the valley. The third stage was the low-visibility southern plantation which contained quite a bit of rock. This required well-defined attack points before entering the plantation and offered interesting route choices between the forest, a track network and some open leads. The last controls for all courses were in a marshy paddock beneath the admiring gaze of the spectators.

Commentary on marked legs shown on map:

1. Into the forest. A descending, contouring leg. Left or right around the large logpile then choice of two rides left, ride right or straight. The first 300 metres of the edge of the map was taped and signed to prevent people running off the map. 2. Across the gullies. Wide left through open pasture around the top of the gullies, choice of rides right with loss of height around the bottom of the gullies or straight. 3. Over or around the hill. Track left, track or ride right or a 10 contour climb over the top, either following the ride or direct.

Following the ride over the top gave better attack points but was more circuitous. 4. Into the marshes. Out of the constricting plantation and into the open pasture. Faster running but you had to stay in touch with the map to avoid overshooting the controls. 5. Into the gullies. Pick the right gully from four similar parallel gullies. The open terrain is not your friend here as there is a tendency to select a gully visually from a distance, rather than navigating in using the compass. 6. Point control. Over a slight rise and down to one of two small erosion gullies. Either accurate rough navigation or navigate off the log piles. 7. Back into the forest, but this one is denser and slower than the northern plantation. You could play safe and run wide on the tracks, follow the branching open gully that bisects the plantation or run straight. The direction of plantings assisted the straight runners. 8. Wide right around the top of the gullies and follow the ride to approach the control from the rear, even wider left on the track, or straight over two gullies then pick the right gully from three similar branches to regain the track. A good attack point was required before leaving the track. 9. Careful navigation through the maze of open leads or run wide to the track or ride. 10. Straight through the plantations or a three contour climb to take the ride on the right. Control features

Once the rough shape of the courses was identified we walked the map and located attractive control sites on the ground. This was done before designing the courses because we had read that up to 30% of control sites selected from the map might subsequently prove to be unsuitable. Without hiding controls it was our intention that runners should have to approach them with confidence before sighting the flag. This was particularly important in the open central section of the map where controls might otherwise have been visible from a considerable distance. Over 100 possible control locations were selected and then assessed for interesting combinations. Several attractive ‘lines’ were identified and incorporated into as many courses as possible. Some of these lines are identified on the accompanying map. Control overload and ‘following’ was avoided by using multiple control locations at the beginning and end of each line. The Condes course setting software was invaluable in this regard. It calculated the loading on each control and enabled all courses to be overlaid on the same screen to ensure that no courses shared more than two or three consecutive controls.

On the day

On the day of the event at 9.46am the start crew released the first of the runners. Having wound the mechanism it was intriguing to watch it unfold. Observation of the runners showed all the anticipated route choices being used – and a few choices that hadn’t been anticipated. Things we would do differently (should there be a) next time On the day before the event one of the test runners identified a misplaced control. This resulted from a late change to the courses to correct two similar control features positioned too close to one another. The change escaped the standard sequence of independent taping and checking and was placed from the ‘wrong’ direction. This showed that:

1. You can’t start planning too soon; 2. You can’t check too carefully; and 3. Controls should be taped and vetted from the direction runners are likely to arrive.

We later learned that at another event the course setters were asked to check the map for accuracy within 100 metres of every control. This would help verify accuracy of control locations and also improve the accuracy of the map (which is, after all, only one person’s symbolic representation of the terrain). Anyone wishing to review the courses and route choices taken by the runners can inspect them at http://www.tasorienteering.asn. au/tas_e_results.htm by clicking on the Route Gadget link.