Latest News: Read more

Discussion Forum - Events - I've got the distance down to ... miles

Author: Julian Brown
Posted: Mon 6th Jun 2005, 17:02
Joined: 1998
Local Group: Staffordshire
At the other end of the scale (i.e. I've got the distance up to ... miles) - has anyone tried, (maybe on an event or group walk over country where a lead might not be required all the time) putting one of those GPS thingies on their dog (one of those light ones designed for runners to wear on their wrists) and finding out how many extra miles dogs do in comparison with us 2-legged folk. I reckon the average dog can do twice what we can in half the time !! Wouldn't work with Parsley though - he knows the way too well doesn't he ?
Posted: Mon 6th Jun 2005, 17:02
Joined: 2005
Just to say that I think all the LDWA events are brilliantly organised, the route descriptions are usually spot on, and I always respect the route. I do sometimes feel that the route descriptions takes away some of the fun though. The nice thing about events with no route description is that you know there are several ways of completing the event. I could be way off the mark but I'd be surprised to hear anyone say that the challenge of an event is following the route description to the letter. I understand the other points too but both these issues apply to the Fellsman and the organisation is always spot on with check point opening. Specific routes to take (to use correct styles etc) are sent out with the entry pack and it is up to the participant to include them when mapping the event.
Author: Chris Chorley
Posted: Sat 4th Jun 2005, 14:18
Joined: 1982
Local Group: Norfolk & Suffolk
Not on an event which has a route descrtiption. Three reasons. 1. The organisers may have deliberately avoided dangerous road crossings etc and sensitive properties at night time. 2. They will want the distance between checkpoints defined so that they know when they should open and close them and when to consider walkers missing (ie out of time). 3. Courtesy to the organisers. It takes me about 20 hours to produce a 26 mile route description, let alone printing etc. Why bother if it's not going to be used ? If an event just gives grid references to walk between and that is the objective then that's ok. But if the challenge is to walk a specified route then you should do that. Simple.
Posted: Fri 3rd Jun 2005, 18:26
Joined: 2005
The Fellsman Hike is the king of events in my view and this involves navigating from check point to check point with no questions asked. The checkpoints are placed so you climb the height and cover the distance give or take. If you shorten the distance then it's good navigation. Isn't this the main reason for having checkpoints? The sum of the shortest distances between checkpoints should be the distance of the event.

Author: W. Paul Tremere
Posted: Wed 11th May 2005, 14:30
Joined: 1989
Local Group: East Yorkshire
Several events do not indicate either distance walked or time taken on their certificates. Obviously if times are not recorded, result sheets are not published. This does not seem to detract from the participants' enjoyment, nor reduce their numbers. I think that a 'certificate of completion' and perhaps a completion list of participants should be suffcient. We are, after all, a non competetitive organisation and results imply competition.Incidently I took a short cut at the end of the last challenge walk I did. I was very tired. As no result sheet was issued no one knew but me, until now. Should I return my badge? Perhaps I should cut a bit off the badge to indicate that I did not complete the full route?
Author: Merrian Lancaster
Posted: Tue 3rd May 2005, 14:18
Joined: 1996
Local Group: Beds, Bucks and Northants
I’ve heard the rumours too and think it’s totally unacceptable behaviour – tho’ I've also heard that it's more of a northern disease, with only a few outbreaks in the south (better stay south of The Wash for a while M). Most people are honest, so please let’s keep the route descriptions. Times in and out of checkpoints, and at the end, are needed to keep track of everyone and to help the organisers to plan an event, but I suggest that we don’t put times on certificates and don’t publish results. An alternative is to publish results in alphabetical order.
Author: Chris Chorley
Posted: Mon 2nd May 2005, 16:48
Joined: 1982
Local Group: Norfolk & Suffolk
I've heard the rumour that it's common pre-event preparation (for a minority, I hope) to devise a route which passes through all the checkpoints in the shortest possible distance. Most events specify the following of the given route to be the aim of the challenge, or a rule of the event. Making your own route between checkpoints or grid references is a Kanter isn't it ? If this is common practice then perhaps those of us who spend our time organising events should save the effort required to produce certificates and results sheets; they appear to be meaningless. The route description also seems to be a waste of effort...

This website uses cookies

To comply with EU Directives we are informing you that our website uses cookies for services such as memberships and Google Analytics.

Your data is completely safe and we do not record any personally identifiable information.

Please click the button to acknowledge and approve our use of cookies during your visit.

Learn more about the Cookie Law