Trial and Error

theoretical and practical Orienteering

Subscribe to RSS feed

Posts tagged with "israel"

Israeli winter championships- Additional components to "focus"

, , , ...

This years' winter championships were held in the far north, the Golan Heights. The weather forecast was less the optimal for the two days of the competition, but orienteering can never stop.
The two days were located on a new and extended Odem forest map (For two previous posts on the map see: when-is-an-almost-perfect-race-simply-not-enough, national-squad-training-camp-middle-distance-training).

Map: Odem North
year: 2011
Mapmaker: Dan Chissick
Pace: 3.30-10.00


My first day went well and the weather was ideal. My plan was to run fast and straight, by locating my position all the time using the clearings and the stone walls (very small in this terrain, mostly 2-3 rocks high). I lost some time on my way to control 4 because of deviating from the line, but at least I ran fast. On the way to control 8, I got swept away by the lovely clearings and found myself almost at control 12. I relocated and climbed up to control 8. What I discovered during this race, is that focus doesn't mean accuracy. I was totally focused, but my orientation wasn't good enough. I wasn't running towards the correct directions, although I knew exactly where I was all the time (2-3 is a good example). On this terrain you don't win if you're not accurate.
My biggest problem was fitness. I felt tired from some stage of the race and I felt I'm losing my sharpness towards the end. On control 19 (one control to last) I ran to the first orange prism I saw, which was obviously not mine. This would never have happened to me at the rest of the course.
In general, I felt good with my race, although my pace wasn't all that good. The results were almost identical to last year, with Eran Segal beating me again by 4 minutes. At least this time, I can rest on the fact that it was not a perfect race for me (which doesn't take away any of the well deserved credit for his great win).

Map: Odem South
year: 2011
Mapmaker: Dan Chissick
Pace: 3.30-10.00


The second day was a whole different ball game. The ground was stonier and steeper. The weather was rainy, cold and very foggy (especially around the eastern controls). I ran a much slower pace, due to the given conditions, but much closer to the line. I can find lots to criticize myself for: slowing down on the uphill (11 and 18), messing up around the control (7, 10, 16, 17, 24 and 19, which can be excused by the extreme fog). But all of these are part of the game. What I did on the way to control 8 is inexcusable. I was so frightened of running through that little crater, that I detoured around it and almost lost my way. It still surprises me, how much fear is a factor in this sport: Fear of contours, of green terrain, of a detailed terrain, of a non-detailed terrain, of animals etc. There are so many things to analyze, that many times our decisions are based on some past trauma and not the actual situation. I made the little crater into a mountain to climb, and forced a much longer route based on this ill-assumption.
My conclusion from these two days: Focus is good but it has to be accompanied with accuracy (first day) and rational thinking (the second day) in order for it to provide great results.

Imperfection

, , ,

A few days ago I heard a radio program on Hebrew linguistics. The expert was discussing the historical dynamics of language in general and proverbs in particular.
The most interesting example was the formation of the Hebrew proverb "A mistake will always repeat" (Ta'ut Le'olam Hozeret). This proverb is commonly used and means that mistakes are a chronic illness. The same mistake will happen again and again as part of our imperfection.
The linguist explained that this was distorted from the saying (Ta'ut- Le'olam hozer) which meant that he who makes a mistake, can always retract. The contradicting proverbs are just a result of changing the subject of the sentence from the mistaken (who could turn back) to the mistake (which will come back).
This is the lesson language teaches as orienteers (and people). If you don't turn back while making a mistake, learn from it and tame the ego, the same mistake will keep coming back. This is what I will show next.

Map: Bikat Hanezirim
Mapmaker: Zef Segal, Ziv Neumann
Year: 2011
Pace: 3.30-10.00



Turning back to orienteering (the sole purpose of this blog), yesterday we enjoyed the first national league event of the year. I came with high expectations but wasn't happy with my performance.
Controls 1-4 went relatively easy and flowing (minor stops around 2). On the way to control 5, I reached
a clearing (the first red patch on my route to 5). It took me some time to realize my location, but instead of learning from my mistake and choosing clearer routes, I went on running in a "general direction". This cost me time in controls 6 and 7. The rest was fine (slight mistake around control 15) until I reached leg 18-19. Instead of learning from my previous experience and avoid the green, I decided to beat mother nature. As I said before, if you don't beat your ego, the mistake will repeat itself. I got lost inside the forest only to find myself relatively close to the control (luck and very little else).
But I kept the worst for last. Controls 22-25 were a total fiasco. I couldn't get any leg right. I kept on running in the correct direction and then losing track. The course was teaching me the same lesson, that should have been learnt around control 5, again and again.
Why is it so hard for us to correct our ways, to learn from our mistakes? I guess it's hard to fight against our ego, that tells us that the mistakes are glitches and nothing more.
It all comes down to one big question: Who will be the subject (of the sentence, of the blog, of the course and of life), the mistaken or the mistake?

Diversity and controller's ingenuity

, , , ...

What I like about orienteering (in addition to previous remarks I've said) is its capacity and scope. It holds in it such a variety of terrains and games, that sometimes seem so different. This weekend was a demonstration of the first.

Map: Tel Kakun
Mapmaker: Ziv Neumann
Year: 2011
Pace: 3.30-10.00


On Thursday a small park (full of 60 year old ruins) was used for a training course. The map is only 1.2 squared km, but the controller managed to turn a tiny map into a fast paced tricky route. 27 controls were placed in three different loops, and those who wanted could compete with others by starting with different loops. It was hard to keep focused all the time on such a small scale (1:2500) and short legs, so my second loop was a lot slower due to mistakes. (7:18, 8:30, 5:15 were my loop times).

Map: Merkaz Hefer
Mapmaker: Omer Gardi
Year: 2011
Pace: 3.30-10.00


Saturday's event was the exact opposite. A large map full of agricultural groves and fields, green houses and villages was used for a 2 hour score competition. I chose to run clockwise. After a month and a half of barely running, I couldn't hold the pace for 2 hours, and as my route shows, I started walking from control 15 onwards.

Both events were examples of how controllers can maximize any terrain given to them. In both cases, a way was found to utilize the map and the terrain for an orienteering event. Orienteering is great because all you need is a map. It doesn't matter if the map depicts the garden, the neighborhood, the nearby park, forest or region. All maps can be turned into a playing field for us orienteers.
Each person can have his/her preferences, but one can't deny that orienteering encompasses all of these styles.

Optimal route choice- Aesthetic decision making

, , ,

Score competitions are to orienteering what orienteering is to long distance running. The added component of creating your own route adds an extra layer of mental abilities and choice taking. Some might say that this added layer (creating a course) is a bit too much and prefer sticking to normal orienteering courses. For my part, I love irregular concepts of competitions that keep us from being square (isn't that what brought us to this sport in the first place).
Score isn't just good in itself. It provides an insight into the competitors route choices. Last weekend we (My wife, my daughter and me) participated in a double collecting event (all points had to be collected in an order of your choice). This event was held in two separate maps: Akhbara (a steep open forest) and Ein Zeitim South (Very stony open forest). I ran relatively slowly, but my main problem was my route choices.

Map: Akhbara
Mapmaker: Dan Chissick
Year: 2009
Pace: 3:30-10:00


I decided to take the controls anticlockwise, which wasn't a bad idea in itself. The main focus here was reducing the climb. Controls 6 and 11 were obvious starting points. Then the downhill begins (5, 16, 15, 13 with a big mistake on the way to it). I debated what to do with controls 1, 10, 12, 14 and did the wrong thing. I (ignoring my way to control 10) zigzagged across contour lines until I got to control 2 with very little power left in my legs. It would have probably been better to take controls 10 and 14, run up the road to 12 and 1 with only once to climb up instead of doing it twice.
Instead of trying to optimize my route, I was trying to make it more aesthetic (no diagonals).
Afterwards the course was pretty straightforward 2,8,7,9,3 and 4.
I lost by 2 minutes, just because Guy Sabo, who came first, forgot a control and had to run and get it at the end. I'm sure he would have beaten me by much more.

Map: Ein Zeitim South
Mapmaker: R.Ondracek, L.Krticka
Year: 2004
Pace: 3:30-10:00


I went anticlockwise again, starting from the northern part. For some reason, I was sure controls 6 and 15 were both under the cliff line on the steep hillside in the western part of the map. My plan was to finish off the northern part and go south under the cliffs. This semi-crazy plan lead to a route of 5,8,11,6,15. I started running from 6 to 15 only to realize my idiocy. I was too embarrassed to run up to control 8 and preferred to go half way on the hillside.
From 15, the course was simple 4, 7, 3 (choices due to easy routes and stone walls leading me towards the controls). The next three were the same in any order taken. (14, 9, 16), (16, 14, 9), (14, 16, 9). As long as you didn't start at 9 or end at 14 you were fine. Controls 12, 13 and 10 were on a straight line leading up the hill, so there were no dilemmas there.
From 10, I was only thinking about keeping the last control to the end. And for me, the last control must be the one at the edge of the map (again aesthetic decisions instead of rational ones). I took control 2 and then 1 instead of a correct route which would have been 1 and then 2.
The optimal course should have been: 5, 11, 6, 8, 15, 4, 7, 3, 14, 9, 16, 12, 13, 10, 1 and 2. Some changes could be made (7 could be at the end, the middle controls could be muddled up) but I don't think it would matter much.

In conclusion: The problem with score planning is visualization. We try to visualize the course and then might get into aesthetic choice making. By trying to simplify the map we might over simplify it and ignore the details along the way. I started both events by deciding to run anticlockwise, but why did I even assume the run will be circular. My mistakes had to do with over simplifying and trying to create a pretty picture.

Correcting mistakes

, ,

Map: Nofit
Mapmaker: Uzi Avner
Year: 2009
Pace: 3.30-10.00


Today was hot and steep, and yet my mistakes had nothing to with that. They were all a result of missing a final touch at the end of each leg. I wasn't pleased with it, but you should always look on the bright side. Today was a good day for those who correct themselves quickly. Besides for a terrible mistake around control 15, all my mistakes were minimized to seconds.
You can't be perfect all the time (at least not me), but you can learn how to fix the mistakes done as quickly as possible.

What the sport of orienteering is all about

, , ,

Describing a sport is difficult. Some would would describe orienteering as the skillfulness of map reading, others would add the running intensity, but I think these definitions miss the point (at least for my part). All the aforementioned skills are necessary for completing the course, but time trialing skills are what makes it a special sport. This was given an epic example with the Minna Kauppi's win in the women's WOC relay. Nothing can be more fitting as a finish for a world championships than a runner totally lost (after retiring from a race a few days earlier) coming back to win the title. The mental toughness needed to win such a race is incredible and exemplifies the beauty of orienteering as a competitive sport. Since we have no knowledge of our rivals, the gas pedal must be pressed all the time, especially after losing time. never give up is the motto of orienteering.

Friday and Saturday held the first events of the new Israeli season (we close our eyes and imagine that summer is over). My ankle is still swollen from WOC sprint qualification, which made me much more cautious in my run.

Map: Nachshonim
Mapmaker: T. Novak, M. Broulik, P.Prikryl
Year: 2007 (updated)
Pace: 3:30-10:00


As I just mentioned, I was very cautious, which made my orienteering much more exact. I had no trouble finding the controls (besides control 13 located in a problematic part of the map) but my pace was in no ways good. I was running steadily on paths and slowly in places with stony or tricky grounds (controls 6, 8 and 12). Like Minna, as my mentor for this weekend, I just went on, to find out to my surprise that I won the race with a margin of one minute and a half. All I did was ignore all the rest, forget about the fact that others might run faster than me for now and do my best. Time trialing is all about getting to the end with the best time, not winning the battles along the way.

Map: Tel Hadid
Mapmaker: Sergey Yakimov
Year: 2003
Pace: 3:30-10:00

Today's race showed this much clearer. My ankle felt better and allowed me to run faster, but (and perhaps because of it) I messed up the first control by 1:30 minutes (partly my fault, for not being careful and partly the organizers fault for misplacing the start). I cleared my mind and focused on the next control. From that point on, I had a streak of winning legs, which eventually won me the course despite a terrible 12th leg (again partly my fault for not being careful and partly the fault of a not updated light green forest which shrunk).
The win today surprised me again and showed that orienteering can be won in all different ways. Friday was all about stability, Saturday was all about recovering from mistakes, but both were won by not letting go, not giving up- Minna's way.

Rules are meant to be broken

, , , ...

In some sports a referee is cursed, whether he errs or not. In others, you never argue with the ref (whether he is wrong or right). To my naivetý, I thought that our sport has nothing to do with these schools of thought. Until today's sprint qualifications and finals.
So much has happened today: I sprained my ankle (which might mean no israeli relay team), we qualified to the sprint finals (good thing I have Pavel Gvozdev in my TEAM) and he finished in a solid 26th spot. But all this must be put aside for the real story of the day- the orienteering judicial system.
The numbers were as following: 4 crossed an unpassable verandah, a couple came past the given time, and the remainder of the 41 men and 11 women, who were disqualified, crossed forbidden lawns at the finish area. Up to here, things sound reasonable, besides for the huge numbers. But, in addition, 50+ men and 40+ women crossed an uncrossable wall. Due to the enormous numbers, these acts were not penalized. Adding to the farce of applying the rulls as bent as needed was the decision to accept the appeal of three finalists, who were disqualified earlier in the day. These three ran at the end of the sprint finals, making a mockery of the event.
Orienteering rules are so simple to follow. There shouldn't be any form of debate over penalizing forbidden actions. The numbers should not be a factor in this decision. Punching or not punching should be the only question relevant. Anything else should be clear.The only cases in which I can imagine a need for a change of disqualification is when technology was a problem (This also happened at the sprint finals) or a control which was ill-stationed (bad map or bad control setters), both of these cases did not apply here. All other circumstances seem unreasonable.

world champion, again!!

, , , ...

Well, I'm not the official world champion, but you have to grab what you can. I'm the unofficial world champion in the finish sprint. If you browse through the split times, you would most likely find all the firsts at the top of the list. Finding the winner of this final leg will require looking down to place 31 on men c.
I can consider it world champion because this leg is the same for all runners. Silly but true.
men c- middle qualifications
Now to the real course story. My plan worked well- cutting to the nearest trail and using it. I made a three minute mistake around control 5 because of cutting to early from the trail leading to it. I arrived at the knolls north-west of the control, where I found a depression and a gully but nothing else matched. I went back to the southern path and ran to the control. This cost me aprox. 3-4 minutes and was a totaly unforced error (as said in a completely different sport). I had a few more small mistakes at controls 1 & 9, both because of coming from the wrong side of the cliff. In general I was pleased with my performance, although I hoped to run less than 35 minutes.
The rest of the team made too many mistakes for this competition, and lost time around the controls.
Now we are left with the sprint and the relays. Maybe there, one of us will shine.

Title explanation: in the only woc I participated in (hungary), I won the final leg in long and middle qualifications, won my sprint course but lost by 1 second to another course leader. As I said before, silly but true, and gives a purpose at the end of the run.

Long distance qualification- Day I

, , , ...

When I arrived at the arena, I saw the first male runners finish their run. In between, I was pleased to hear the anouncer stating Pavel's name as second palce in the first radio control. Unfortunately, he lost some minutes in the latter part of the race and missed out on a place in the finals.
Guy's debut in Woc wasn't what he expected. He lost time in the climbs, but also in the technical forest. The lack of experience in 1:15,000 detailed maps was to blame. He couldn't develop any speed or rythem, since he had to constantly stop to read the map.
It was a wierd race. Big gaps between winners and last finalists, awful mistakes made by favorites in late stages of the run (Pavel is one example, Daniel Hubmann is another) and a slow pace (which deceives, since the meadows made the pace faster than the real forest areas permitted).
Pavel's commentry (Pavel's course): "The first part of the race was quite easy' open meadows with good visibility. Control 4 to 5- The great wall after control 4 convinced me that the best way is a detour through the big path. I ran along the forbidden ground and then on the path to the little trail leading to control 5. My strategy was running on paths and constantly knowing where I am, based on obvious obstacles. My main mistakes happened when I stopped doing that. I lost 4 minutes on route to control 7 because I stopped counting the paths and was confused by little cliffs on the way. I started wandering around, up and down, back and forth, until I arrived at the control on my way to the open terrain in the north.
I lost a couple of minutes on my way to control 9. I planned to run on the western path and cut down in the correct trail but on the way to the path, I mistaked it with a tiny trail that came before. Things didn't seem right, but I continued with it untill I hit a cliff, which convinced me that I was lost. I realized where I was (the end of the trail exactly south of control 8) and decided to run through the eastern path to control 9. I ran as fast as I could, only to understand that I wasn't counting trails. I had to reach the road and only then start climbing to the control. In general, the forest was not impossible, but it forces you to stay alert. Losing focus results in losing valuable time."

Tomorrow is a new day.

long distance training (one day before it starts)

, , , ...

* Due to unfortunate internet problems, I will use other blogs for maps.

A short riddle: if 3 orienteers drive up to an altitude of 1500 meters, run down 75 meters, run up 150 meters, run down 50 meters, drive down 500 meters, walk up 350 meters and run down 350 meters, will any energy be left for tomorrow?

Yesterday (Friday) was the last preparation day for WOC, and we used it for long distance training. The pace was monitored and relaxed and the work was mainly technical.
We started with the long model event at Chalets de Crolles. The course was start-235-232-231-246-244-241-245-239-238-247-240-237-start. We wanted to start with a bit of meadow practice (downhill and uphill in the open terrain) followed by a dive into the thick forest. The forest seems nicer to run than in may, but I think it has to do with this specific model terrain and not the whole forest. In general the map was readable, although Pavel took time in 241, Guy and me at 244. Mistakes happen, the question is howyou fix them and what do you learn from them.

Chalets de Crolles

From there we drove to Prepoulain. We parked at the foot of the map, climbed to control 7 (330 meters up) and started. To our embarecement, we lost our way to control 7. Three members of the Israeli orienteering team, walking slowly up a mountain couldn't find the control. We somehow shifted from the trail north of the control to the one south of it.
We evantually found it and started the run. The start was positioned here, in order for the run to be contour friendly (mainly downhill). 7-6-5-15-16-parking lot (north eastern corner of the map). This terrain was hard and the map was very selctive in its mapped objects (I'm not clear about the rule of thumb for the map makers choices). A few of the controls had prisms and others did not, so control 15 (which didn't have a prism) turned out to be a problem for Guy Sabo and me. We started correctly, but then climbed too high up and reached the trail above it. Once there is no prism, identifying your location becomes even trickier. The downhill part from 15 to 16 and from 16 to the end was nice and quick.
Prepoulain

In the evening we went to a nice Friday night supper at a restaurant. The atmosphere was good, Guy and Pavel are all hyped up for today's race. All we can do from now on is watch and let them run.