From: LANAM_JEFF@tandem.com
Date: 10 Aug 94 18:16:00 +1700
Subject: O: Orienteering Glossary?
Message-Id: <199408101900.AA2361@comm.Tandem.COM>
Jenny and Vladimir's questions got me to wondering if there is a list
of words used in orienteering, with their particular O'meanings? This
would be a big help to novices as well as non-English speakers. I've
often been stuck coming up with a definition of "re-entrant", for
example. "Copse" threw me the first time I saw it. If any one has
one, or has words to supply, please respond to me. I'll compile and
send out the result. Then it can be added to the WWW page. I'll
start from the USOF "A" meet rules. That is, unless someone already
has done this!
Also, has there been any attempt to create a USENET newsgroup?
Much of the traffic on the dlist would be better handled by one.
Jeff
From: Rhea Jacobs <rljacobs@crl.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 16:57:02 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: the o-net
Message-Id: <Pine.3.87.9408101602.A18521-0100000@crl4.crl.com>
Just to put aside one complaint about the Michigan rogaine: Don't worry
about the Spam bonus penalizing observant Jews. Since the rogaine would
presumably take place on a weekend (including the Sabbath), observant
Jews wouldn't participate in any case. (Even if they didn't have to
drive, they wouldn't be able to carry packs or compasses!)
The rogaine does sound like fun, though.
###################################################################
## Rhea Jacobs - The Dogtown Doggerel Factory - St. Louis ##
## rljacobs@crl.com or au567@yfn.ysu.edu ##
###################################################################
From: M.Ziebell@isu.usyd.edu.au (Mark Ziebell)
Date: Thu, 11 Aug 1994 09:29:30 +1000
Subject: WWW -- OANSW '95 schedule & OAWA
Message-Id: <1761FDA2B07@spiro.ucc.su.oz.au>
As Tapio Leino and Stig Magnar Lovas have said WWW is unsuitable for
discussions. The "o-net" can be used to publicise "static" documents that
are made available through the WWW.
Earlier I announced the 1995 OANSW schedule was available. Please note that
the final version is now available. It can be accessed through the hierarchy
of Rick Slater's home page or directly thru the URL:
http://www.usyd.edu.au/~markz/oz-o/nsw/oansw.schedule95.html
Also there is now a OAWA server
http://www.uwa.edu.au/rec/oawa
If anyone does not have a WWW browser and would like to access these through
e-mail, please mail me direct.
Mark
From: Wyatt Riley <t-wyattr@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 94 16:49:41 -0700
Subject: Re: Results Acronyms...
Message-Id: <9408102358.AA02393@netmail2.microsoft.com>
Wyatt writes:
< acronym stuff >
Vladimir replies:
| In the very same August ONA issue, I saw a ``BYE'' as Beatrice McBride's
| result for the 1st classic day of the CO5d. Could Mikell or J-J please shed
| some light on what this one is?
A "BYE" is very rarely used in orienteering results; in fact, the
Colorado 5 day was the fist time I have ever seen it used in race
results of any kind. A "BYE" usually means a person or team did not
compete, but got credit in some way for competing. A "BYE" is usually
used in an single elimination tournament (of, for example, tennis)
where the total number of competitors is not a power of 2. When this
happens, then in the first round of competition, some people have to
play others to get to the 2nd round, where others get a "BYE" and,
without competing, they get automatically moved to the next round.
In the case of the 5 day event, Beatrice set the courses on Day 1, and
thus did not compete. She did however, get to participate in the whole
5 day event and in the chase start using a estimated "time" for the
first day based on her results on the following 3 days.
Wyatt
From: "Vladimir P. Gusiatnikov" <vladimir@physics.purdue.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 18:37:08 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Results Acronyms...
Message-Id: <199408102337.SAA27870@bohr.physics.purdue.edu>
Wyatt Riley writes:
> DNF - Did Not Finish
> DNS - Did Not Start
> DQ - DisQualified
> DSQ - DiSQualified
> MSP - MiSPunched (for an incorrect punch, this should be used instead of DQ.)
> OT - OverTime
> OVT - OVerTime (beyond the course time limit, usually the time is not
> reported.)
> RET- RETired from the course (an honorable DNF, sometimes used in
> results)
>
In the very same August ONA issue, I saw a ``BYE'' as Beatrice McBride's result
for the 1st classic day of the CO5d. Could someone (Mikell or J-J or...) please
shed some light on what this one is?
Vladimir.
From: Wyatt Riley <t-wyattr@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 94 13:26:28 TZ
Subject: Results Acronyms...
Message-Id: <9408102035.AA22479@netmail2.microsoft.com>
Jenny Petersson pointed out that many standard English results acronyms
may be difficult to interpret, especially by the many o-netters who
speak other languages... so here's a brief (and hopefully not to
controversial) list.
DNF - Did Not Finish
DNS - Did Not Start
DQ - DisQualified
DSQ - DiSQualified
MSP - MiSPunched (for an incorrect punch, this should be used instead of DQ.)
OT - OverTime
OVT - OVerTime (beyond the course time limit, usually the time is not
reported.)
RET- RETired from the course (an honorable DNF, sometimes used in
results)
From: "Vladimir P. Gusiatnikov" <vladimir@physics.purdue.edu>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 15:13:32 -0500 (EST)
Subject: typos in the Aug issue
Message-Id: <199408102013.PAA22448@bohr.physics.purdue.edu>
Dear Sara Mae and Larry:
In the "Report From the 1994 IOF Congress" in the indicated issue, several things
attracted my attention. First, Macedonia was mentioned as part of Yugoslavia;
the former Yugoslav republic of Macedonia is an independent state. Second,
one of the lines said: "Junior World Champs for 1996 will be in Slovak Republic
and for 1998, in France". Has the IOF now decided not to hold JWOC's at all
for odd-numbered years? If so, this will mean inadequate opporunities for
participation. Third, it was not mentioned and it would be interesting
to know whether, according to the new WOC format, there are going to be
two separate qualifying races for short and classic or one race will serve
as the qualifier for both.
Yours, Vladimir Gusiatnikov
From: seibert@scorpio.kent.edu
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 10:39:59 -0400
Subject: orienteering near Budapest
Message-Id: <9408101439.AA15233@scorpio.kent.edu>
I will be in Budapest from August 24 to September 2. Does anyone out there
know what events are being run near there, and/or know some local people who
are likely to be competing (and who might be willing to provide a ride)?
Please reply directly to me rather than posting, as there probably aren't
many people out there who will care about Hungarian events. Thanks,
David Seibert
From: Jenny Petersson <jenny@cs.chalmers.se>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 15:05:26 +0200
Subject: Re: O Article #27
Message-Id: <199408101305.PAA01097@muppet78.cs.chalmers.se>
Brian May <bmay@Phys.Ocean.Dal.Ca> writes in respond to Bryan Teahan:
> With each control circle carefully centred on the appropriate
> feature, one should certainly not DNF, based on picking up the wrong
> control descriptions. The potential for a DSQ is certainly there
> but not a DNF!!
(Brian, I took the liberty to edit your long one line sentence into
four normal sized lines.)
Not being English speaking I have difficulties with these acronyms. I
guess DSQ stands for Disqualified, but DNF?
As to control circles carefully centred, it's still not guaranteed
that you can do without the right control descriptions. With the
combination of detailed terrain and a devilish course setter (posts on
a number of closely situated objects, some even similar in type) you
really need both descriptions and codes. In such situations I think
having the wrong descriptions can be worse than having none.
Jenny Petersson
From: ab401@freenet3.carleton.ca (Paul Tomblin)
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 12:04:00 GMT
Subject: Re: O Article #27
Message-Id: <CuBIuo.HwL@freenet.carleton.ca>
In a previous article, Brian May <bmay@Phys.Ocean.Dal.Ca> said:
>
>With each control circle carefully centred on the appropriate feature, one should certainly not DNF, based on picking up the wrong control descriptions. The potential for a DSQ is certainly there but not a DNF!!
[try a return or two, Brian]
At the Canadians in Manitoba, Eric Westerlund passed me at one point. He
asked me the code for the next control, since he'd lost his control
description. I believe he still finished in the top 5.
I'm always amazed by the fact that top orienteers like Eric Westerlund or Ted
de St. Croix always have time for a friendly "Hi Paul, how's it going" when
they pass me. Not like cross country skiing where you're lucky if the guy
passing you can get out the word "track" rather than "huh!".
Paul
From: Stig Magnar Lovas <Stig.M.Lovas@nhl.sintef.no>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 13:02:28 +0200
Subject: Re: www - World Wide Web experiences
Message-Id: <199408101102.AA01430@nhl-1.nhl.sintef.no>
Fellow O-netters,
Nice to see you have entered the vast world of WWW/Mosaic Tapio. However,
from my point of view WWW is never meant to be a discussion media, but a nice
and easy way to store, find and retrieve information. I see the nice WWW-server
prepared by Rick Slater as a forum for more 'time-independent' information like
info to newcomers, club info, competition schedules, and more short-term info
like start and result lists. Start lists require however removal after the
competition date to free storage space. Result lists could e.g. be available
until 2-4 weeks after the competition before being removed. The o-net is for
discussion and short info messages, e.g. info on new items on the WWW.
By the way, any news on results from the Veteran World Championships in
Scotland?
Stig M. Lovas,
OK Nidarost, Norway
e-mail: lovas@nhl.sintef.no
From: Brian May <bmay@Phys.Ocean.Dal.Ca>
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 08:03:35 -0300
Subject: Re: O Article #27
Message-Id: <94Aug10.080342adt.46085@Phys.Ocean.Dal.Ca>
Bryan Teahan (who obviously has a little too much time on his hands) writes:
> +-------|-----------+ +----------------|--------------+ +-------|--------+
> | to contend with a | | the misfortune to pick up the | | been given the |
> +-------|-----------+ +--------------------------|----+ +-------|--------+
> +---+---------+------------+-----------+ +-------+------+
> +---|---+ +-------|-----+ +----|-----+ +---|---+ +---|---+
> | cruel | | incompetent | | sadistic | | bingo | | wrong |
> +---|---+ +-------|-----+ +----|-----+ +---|---+ +---|---+
> +-------------+------+-----+-----------+ |
> | +---------+----+ +--+--+
> +---------+---+ | control | | map.|
> +---|----+ +-----|---------+ | descriptions.| |(DNF)|
> | mapper | | course setter | | (DNF) | +-----+
> +---|----+ +-----|---------+ +--------------+
^^^^
||||
With each control circle carefully centred on the appropriate feature, one should certainly not DNF, based on picking up the wrong control descriptions. The potential for a DSQ is certainly there but not a DNF!!
Brian
From: tapio.leino@vtt.fi (Tapio Leino)
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 11:47:32 +0300
Subject: www - World Wide Web experiences
Message-Id: <199408100847.LAA06941@vtt.fi>
Hi Folks,
I admit I didn't quite understand what Mark Ziebell and Richard Slater
tried to say when they quite unexpectedly started to talk about the www
here in the o-net. I thought they had sent their messages to a wrong list.
Now because of a certain task here in the office I have installed Mosaic
in my PC and am able to browse all the Internet hypertext information
with it. I also have installed the rdslater-orienteering homepage to my
"hotlist", and my first discovery was that it only was a nice way to
archive all the o-net messages. As such it clearly exceeds the skills
of any my old network software.
I can't say that the www-system is any better than our usual o-net
which is based on the e-mail, I doubt it. They are different and serve
different needs. I don't think the www is as well suited to discussions
concerning the o-topics as the o-net. But I may be wrong of course.
Tapio
_______________________________________________________________________
VTT/Building Technology - Metal and Composite Structures
P.O.BOX 1807, FIN-02044 VTT, Finland
Tel. +358-0-456 6683, Telefax +358-0-456 7003
e-mail: tapio.leino@vtt.fi
From: Jean-Joseph Cote <71163.3347@compuserve.com>
Date: 10 Aug 94 03:10:28 EDT
Subject: intriguing relay results
Message-Id: <940810071027_71163.3347_DHQ23-1@CompuServe.COM>
Normally I wouldn't post results from a local meet, but I thought this
might be a special circumstance...
The Second Annual RMOC Vegetable Relay was held on August 7, 1994 at
Florissant Fossil Beds Nat. Mon., Colorado, USA. It was a two-leg relay,
and competitors were allowed to run more than one leg for different teams,
or for the same team. As it turns out, in the elite category all runners
did both legs, most for the same team, but Mikell Platt and J-J Cote ran
their legs for different teams. A catchup mass start was used after some
vague but rather short time (let's call it 7.5 minutes), but it didn't
matter much, because most of the second-leg runners weren't back from the
first leg yet. Oh, yeah, one more thing: this relay used master maps:
the first leg was copied before the start, and the second leg was copied
after the tagoff. There was only one master map for the second leg; luckily
the field spread enough that there were no conflicts.
Full results for the elite category:
J-J Cote/Mikell Platt 25:19 22:41 48:00
George Scott/George Scott 28:58 29:19 58:17
Mikell Platt/J-J Cote 21:28 33:19 58:38
Bob McBride/Bob McBride 26:38 34:03 60:41
Beatrice McBride/Beatrice McBride 32:02 33:05 65:07
Bob Ellis/Bob Ellis 35:38 40:03 75:41
A splendid time was had by all. Everyone received bananas and pears as
awards, which by the way meet my criteria that all prizes should be edible.
J-J
From: cai@cryptic.rch.unimelb.edu.au
Date: Wed, 10 Aug 1994 14:21:20 +1000
Subject: Re: Rogaining: Re: reply to Rod Phillips
Message-Id: <9408101314.AA03646@cryptic.rch.unimelb.edu.au>
Reply to question from Mitch Collinsworth below.
>
>Bob Reddick wrote about a rogaine where the second placed team
>had a member hospitalised briefly during the event before returning to
>compete.
>
>>>Rod Phillips asked,
>>>"This intigued me. Can you still be in the placings if you've been to
>>>hospital (presumably by car) in the middle of an event."
>>>
>>And Peter Taylor replied:
>>There isn't anything in the rules of rogaining that says teams have to
>>remain in the hash-house area after having checked in at the hash-house
>>during the event. So going to hospital is
>>OK, even in a car, provided you have checked in at the Hash House
>>first, and check in again before going out on the course.
>
>and Rod replied
>I suspect you'd have trouble convincing me of that if I was the rogaine
>coordinator. I think you have problems on several fronts.
>Firstly, you must compete entirely on foot and not travel by any other
>means. This is not limited by any criteria about checking in or out.
>Secondly, a team shall not accept assistance from, or collaborate with,
>other people. Again, this applies irrespective of whether you have checked
>in for a break.
>Thirdly, a team which breaches any of the rules because of an emergency is
>deemed to have withdrawn. .........deleted.......
>Mind you, this is somewhat academic. I'm all for keeping the emphasis of
>rogaining on its strengths, namely that enjoyable participation beats
>competition hands down any day. I would happily oblige any team wanting to
>continue competing after a hospital visit and would allow their score to be
>recorded, even give them a paragraph of praise in the newsletter. But they
>probably shouldn't get an official placing.
>
>Mitch Collinsworth in : Re: reply to Rod Phillips asks
>
>I suppose then this calls into question the practice of a competitive
>team handing in their score card and then driving to a motel to catch
>a few hours sleep before returning and resuming the race. Not (yet)
>a widespread practice, but one I've heard has happened.
>
At most rogaines, the underlying philosophy of putting participation first
makes people relaxed about practices such as described, particularly when
the "offenders" are not highly competitive. The most important rule in
rogaining has always been the last one, that organisers shall be guided by
a sense of fair play. As an organiser, I would probably assume that someone
driving to a nearby town to make a phone call hasn't gained any advantage,
I might make the same decision about a team going in to town to sleep with
friends, and I probably wouldn't if they had gone to hospital to be
resuscitated. No one is running for sheepstakes.
However, where there is some significance being attached to the
competition, there has to be a stricter interpretation of the rules. The
event Bob Reddick described was the North American rogaining championships.
At this rogaine, full championship rules must apply and there is no doubt
that the team whose member went to hospital benefited greatly from outside
assistance and thereby lost their chance to get a placing. No big drama for
them (at least it shouldn't be) but that's life.
-----------------------------------
Rod Phillips
Department of Paediatrics
Royal Children's Hospital
Melbourne 3052 AUSTRALIA
Voice 61-3-3455522
Fax 61-3-3456000
From: Martin Minow <minow@apple.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Aug 94 20:19:04 -0700
Subject: re: Radio tracking at 1989 O-Ringen
Message-Id: <9408100319.AA21011@apple.com>
I had the great pleasure (visualize a sadistic grin) of visting the
computer-tracking site for the radio-tracking trial run. A few memories:
-- it was setup in a farmhouse outside of Sundsvall.
-- the idea was that orienteers would wear small Loran receivers that
would broadcast their coordinates to the tracking center, which would
then display the runner's location on a map.
-- The company that put this together had used the same technology with
great success at, as I recall, the America's Cup race in Perth.
-- It didn't work.
-- Loran is meant for sea-surface navigation, the signal could not be
received with decent quality in the forest.
-- A Swedish farmhouse is built for very cold weather. Putting a dozen
minicomputers inside of one in the summer (no, there was no air-
conditioning) turned the tracking station into a mosquito farm,
and a very successful one at that.
Although I'm quite certain that remote tracking is fairly easy to do,
the Sundsvall experiment offers a good example of how not to do it.
Martin Minow
minow@apple.com