TECHNICAL GUIDELINESFORELITE TRAIL ORIENTEERING

Timed control at the Ice House ponds, Day 2, WTOC 2012 Scotland

IOF Trail Orienteering Commission
2014

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Summary
The key to high quality competition in elite international TrailO is good terrain, good
maps, good planning and good controlling. This document, issued by the IOF Trail
Orienteering Commission, advises on each of these elements and specifies the IOF
interpretations of the rules and established practice. These guidelines replace allprevious issues of planning guidelines. They apply to all IOF events in trail
orienteering for both PreO and TempO formats. They are also recommended as abasis for any TrailO event.
Trail orienteering continues to evolve and the IOF TrailO Commission may issue
corrections and additions from time to time.

PREFACEThis is the five-year revision of the Guidelines. Since 2009 the discipline of TrailO has
evolved considerably and, as you might expect with an activity that demands precisionand detail, those two elements require more description and definition than everbefore in the guidelines. These latest Guidelines are a third larger than those of five
years ago.
It is the view by some in the discipline that this detail has gone too far and it would bebetter to simplify and reduce the Guidelines to a much slimmer document. Theirargument is that more written detail leads to more opportunity for controversy about
flag placement and more complaints. This is certainly the case if the planning has
been less than rigorous. The opposite view is that less precise definition allows moreinterpretation and more opportunity to disagree with the planner. It also allows lesscareful planning. My impression is that a substantial majority of leading competitorsand officials are of the opinion that increased precision in guidelines is necessary as
the discipline advances. It may be that the next major revision will result in a different
document but, for now, we believe this edition fairly reflects the requirements of the
sport at the current stage of its development.
The Guidelines Revision Working Group hopes that this revision will be of service insupporting elite level trail orienteering for competitors and planners.
Brian Parker
Editor2

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------CONTENTS
1. Introduction …………………………………………………………….…………… 4
Essentials of elite trail orienteering / Elite TrailO and elite FootO compared
Purpose of the Guidelines / Relationship with the Rules
2. Terrain requirements for elite TrailO …………………………………..…….….. 6
Is the visible terrain suitable? / Can a wheelchair competitor get round thecourse?
3. Mapping for elite TrailO …………………………………………….……….…….. 8
Modifying existing maps / Magnetic north
4. Position fixing techniques ………………………………………..…………...... 11
Position at a mapped feature / by contouring / by sighting lines / by compass /by distance estimation / Rough techniques / Position fixing in planning
5. Control specification …………………………………………...………………… 16
Control selection and description / The position of the flag (Column G) /Examples of flag position and description / Good practice / Overlapping controls /The ‘A’ control / Long distance controls / Flag height
6. Zero answers ………………………………………………………………………. 38
7. Other technical considerations ……………….………………………...……… 40
Teamwork / How long is the course and what time is allowed? /More ways than one to a solution / Zero answers /Unmapped and part-mapped features / All flags to have meaning /Decision point / Route choice / Timed controls / Permitted and forbidden routes /Post-competition solution maps / Disagreements, Complaints and Protests /Off-trail is off limits
8. Planning logistics …………………………………………...………………….… 48
Stages 1-4 / Mechanical aids to flag placement
9. Documentation …………………………………………………………...…….…. 52
Appendix 1 - Planning examples for elite TrailO ………………………….….…. 53
Appendix 2 - Timed Control Procedures ………………………………………… 66
Appendix 3 - Example of solution sheet …………………………………...……. 72
Appendix 4 – Example of map sequence marking for timed controls ……… 73

3

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. INTRODUCTION
Trail orienteering (TrailO) is one of the four disciplines of international orienteering.
Developed from the core discipline of foot orienteering, it is a form of the sport inwhich contested physical performance has been eliminated to allow participation bycompetitors with impaired mobility, including those requiring the use of wheelchairs.
Trail orienteering competition at all levels demands skills of map reading and terraininterpretation. At advanced level the competitors’ speed of decision-making is also
tested.
The appeal of trail orienteering has extended to able-bodied orienteers over a wide
range of experience, including world champion foot orienteers. Today TrailO ispractised primarily by the able-bodied, all attracted to its technical challenge, but
provision for mobility-impaired competitors is an essential element of every
competition.
The World Trail Orienteering Championships (WTOC) are open to all-comers,
irrespective of age, gender or physical ability, in which those with mobility disabilities
can compete with the able-bodied on equal terms. There is also a closed ‘Paralympic’class restricted to those eligible and with medically-certified IOF approval.
There are two versions of trail orienteering. In the PreO (Precision orienteering)format the main course controls are untimed but supplemented by one or more timed
controls in which the speed of decision-making is measured, the times being used astie breakers. The newer TempO format consists only of timed controls. In TempO atime penalty is given for each wrong answer, which is added to the time taken on thetimed controls. The total time including penalties then makes up the result list.

ESSENTIALS of ELITE TRAIL ORIENTEERINGIn TrailO the control sites, with a number of marker flags at each site, are out ofbounds to the competitors. The flags are viewed from permitted access routes (trails),
usually tracks and paths, sometimes with wheelchair-friendly deviations off-path, thelimits of which are marked in the terrain.
The competitors are required at each control location to determine whether the feature
at the centre of the circle on the map and defined in the control description is marked
by a flag in the terrain. If this is so, then a letter code is recorded. If not so, with noflag matching the centre of the circle and the control description, a zero answer isrecorded.
Since there are no codes on the flags, as in FootO, the flags are identified insequence from left to right from a viewing point, marked in the terrain but not on themap, as Alpha (A) through to Echo (E) or Foxtrot (F).
An alternative form of problem in PreO competition is simply to identify whether or notthere is a flag at the described and marked site; the answer is either A or Zero.

4

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Currently the decision is recorded in PreO on a control card with six boxes for eachcontrol (A to E and Zero) marked by a pin punch placed a short distance along thecourse from the decision point. Electronic forms of recording are being developed and
IOF-licensed electronic punching systems may become standard.
In solving elite control problems the competitors have to demonstrate advanced
understanding of the relationship between map and terrain. The only permitted
technical aid is a compass.
Further introductory reading is Technical Introduction to Trail Orienteering forExperienced Foot Orienteers (2010) available on the trail orienteering document pageon the IOF web site www.orienteering.org

ELITE TRAIL and FOOT ORIENTEERING COMPARED
There is widespread agreement, both within the trail orienteering discipline andelsewhere in the sport, with the IOF Council declaration that trail orienteering should
follow the same practices as foot orienteering, as far as is sensible and practicable.
Ideally, this means the same mapping, the same control feature selections and thesame descriptions, as well as all the procedures for organising a competition andtaking part in it.
However, this ideal cannot be fully met, because of three significant differences
between the disciplines:

trail orienteers do not enter the terrain;
the use of multiple flags at a control in trail orienteering;
the greatly extended time for decision making at each trail orienteering control,
which allows more information to be extracted from the more detailed andmore accurate map, allowing more attention to be given to the exact placementof the control flag.

These differences produce constraints but also opportunities for trail orienteering toevolve beyond its starting point in foot orienteering. In particular, the expansion of thetime available to examine the terrain (but not at the timed controls, where speed ofdecision is tested) has enabled the use of additional position-fixing techniques tolocate the feature at the centre of the circle matching the control description. Suchtechniques include sighting lines and precise compass bearings.
Also, in modern cartography and map production, the control circles are drawn andprinted within the map, and this results in the centres of the circles being very
precisely located. In earlier years this was not so, particularly with hand-copied
master maps. Therefore, it was necessary to define the position of the control by aprecise description, which had to be unique, in that it indicated a single identifiable
point in the terrain. This convention remains in use for foot orienteering.
In trail orienteering the definition by means of unique description still applies to point
features, which are not mapped to scale and the direction of placement of the control
5

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------flag is only available from the description. However, for features large enough to bemapped to scale, a unique description is no longer an essential requirement, as
careful map and terrain reading can distinguish between flags that have the samedescription. This extends the range of different terrain recognition problems possible
in elite trail orienteering and contributes to its being an extremely challenging andrewarding mental exercise.
Whilst trail orienteering undergoes natural and worthwhile evolution, those responsiblefor its development are conscious that it should retain the same ethos as footorienteering, so that as many as possible of the features of the sport that footorienteers find attractive, are replicated in trail orienteering.

THE PURPOSE OF THESE GUIDELINES
The basis of successful trail orienteering competition is careful control setting. The
planning at elite level of controls which are testing but fair, in that careful analysis of
the map and terrain from the tracks leads to an answer that is significantly better thanthe other options, is particularly difficult and often underestimated by those who havenot taken part in international competition at this level. Therefore most of thisdocument is about the practical issues of control selection and description.
Although prepared for providing technical guidance for elite trail orienteering, theseguidelines can be useful at all levels as participants progress from the basic skills of
introductory courses to the more precise and demanding techniques of national andinternational competition.

RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RULES
These guidelines supplement the IOF Competition Rules for Trail Orienteering Events.
Differences of interpretation between the guidelines and rules are not intended.
Should such a difference occur, the rules shall take precedence.

2. TERRAIN REQUIREMENTS for ELITE TRAILO
There are stringent terrain requirements for trail orienteering.
Two questions have to be answered:(i) Is the visible terrain suitable for Elite Trail Orienteering?
The best TrailO terrain, visible from the tracks and permitted areas, has complex
ground and contour detail demanding skills of map interpretation. If rock, water and6

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------vegetation features are also present, there may be opportunities for adding variety tothe planning.
Man-made features can play a part in elite TrailO but are generally of secondary
value, the best competition being based upon natural detail.
Trying to judge from an existing FootO map, at 1:15000 or 1:10000 scale, whether the
terrain is suitable for elite TrailO, is difficult because TrailO mapping is typically at
1:5000 scale, requiring detail not shown on the FootO map, either because ofgeneralisation smoothing the detail or there is no suitable fine detail present.
The sprint map at 1:5000 or 1:4000 is much more useful but, even so, the terrainmust be visited to make sure there are enough sites of elite standard to support thecompetition and that they can be represented on a map of suitable accuracy.
If the terrain has suitable TrailO features, it is then necessary to assess the quality ofthe existing map in its representation of them, in order to formulate mapping
proposals.

(ii) Can a wheelchair competitor get round the course?
This requirement is often the most difficult to meet at elite level, which requires a hightechnical level of terrain, often only accessible by tracks less wide and/or less smoothsurfaced than ideal.
The IOF Rules for international trail orienteering events state:“The terrain must be chosen so that the least mobile competitors, the person confined
to and propelling a low fixed wheelchair and the person who walks slowly and withdifficulty, can negotiate the course within the maximum time limit, using official
assistance where provided.” Rule14.2
There is also useful guidance in Appendix 1 – Principles of Course Planning for Trail
Orienteering – attached to the Rules.
The wheelchair competitors need firm surfaces and room to turn. This last point isimportant on narrower tracks as competitors will often need to sight a problem fromdifferent positions before making a decision at the viewing point.
The firmness of the surface has to be carefully considered, particularly in softer
ground that may become difficult in wet conditions. It may be necessary for sectionsof the tracks to be repaired for the competition or have temporary surfaces installed.
The gradients on the course may be critical. Appendix 1 of the IOF TrailO Rules gives
information about the limits to gradients for unassisted progress. Particular careshould be taken concerning down slopes in wet conditions.
It is recommended that organisers seek on-site advice of those with practicalknowledge of negotiating surfaces and slopes with wheelchairs.
7

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Difficult sections will need physical assistance from helpers provided by the Organiser.
If the two questions about terrain quality and wheelchair access can be satisfactorily
answered, then an elite event is possible.

3. MAPPING for ELITE TRAILO
Maps for international trail orienteering are based on foot orienteering mapping
specifications. They can be newly surveyed and drawn but also can be modified
versions of existing foot orienteering maps.
Trail orienteering maps are preferably prepared in the ISSOM format, but ISOM is also
acceptable with an additional resize of the symbols.
The preparation and correction of TrailO mapping is closely integrated with theplanning process and is, therefore, included in detail in this document.
Since competitors in trail orienteering are forbidden to leave the tracks, paths andmarked areas, there are a number of consequences for trail orienteering mapping.
The competition area is that adjacent to the trails, generally within 50m, occasionally
100m or more when good visibility and contrast permits the placement of flags atlonger distances.
Concentrating on this greatly reduced area, compared with foot orienteering
competition, requires much more detailed terrain representation. This is achieved bymeans of an enlarged map scale, together with enlarged symbol size.
The following technical guideline (TG) applies:
Map specifications recommended for international trail orienteering: 1:5000 or 1:4000 scale with printed symbol dimensions the same as for
1:10,000 scale maps (i.e. at 150% of conventional 1:15000 footorienteering map symbols in the ISOM specification).
(TG 1)
These specifications closely match those in ISSOM for sprint foot orienteering, thisformat being the preferred option.
Tip: Mappers modifying an existing FootO map for TrailO purposes may need toreassure themselves that the final symbol dimensions are as in the above guideline. It
is not unknown for maps to have some or all of their symbol sizes non-standard.
A good starting point is to check the diameter of a dot knoll. Currently this is 0.75 mm.

8IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In re-scaling from 1:10,000 to 1:5000 (or 1:4000) careneeds to be taken with symbols drawn close together on
the 10,000 map. It is possible that, for legibility, thedistance between such features is greater on the mapthan in the terrain. The increased paper distance on thelarger scale map allows displacements at the smallerscale to be corrected. The diagram illustrates this. The
need for extra precision in fixing features on a TrailO map
applies particularly for features used in sighting lines.
The contour and form lines should give clear indication of the gradient and shape ofthe terrain. A contour interval of 2.5m is recommended but may be reduced for flatterterrain. The height of a contour line may be adjusted by up to 25% to improve therepresentation of a feature, provided relative height differences between closely
adjacent features are maintained. If further representation is required, to indicate adefinite change in gradient, for example, a form line may be used. The form line is nota specific intermediate contour and may be at any height between contours. Only one
form line may be used between adjacent contours (ISOM 2000).
The map must fairly represent the terrain as seen from the trails and permitted accessareas and, in exceptional circumstances, non-visible features may be omitted, if their
inclusion would otherwise unacceptably distort the distances to and between visible
features on the map.
The concept of runnability cannot apply in trail orienteering but there is a close
correlation between runnability and the nature of the vegetation affecting visibility inthe terrain. Difficulties do not normally arise.
The precision with which a control flag is placed in trail orienteering may be to 1m or
less. At a map scale of 1:5000 this is positioning the centre of the control circle to0.2mm. This precision can be achieved with modern printing technology, provided thecontrol circles are integral to the map. Therefore:

The control circles and courses should be integrated into the map prior toprinting. Hand drawing of courses is not permitted. Overprinting ofcourses on already printed maps is not recommended.
(TG 2)

An advantage of using ISSOM symbols in trail
orienteering (the example here is from WTOC
2004) is that the tracks and large paths are
similarly marked. This allows the competitors to
be instructed that, unless marked as no-go on the
map and/or on the ground, all the brown routes
may be used – and no other path.
However, with very short range features the outof-scale width of the path symbol, a minimum of
3m on the ground, might give problems.

9

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------If, under such arrangements, small paths form part of the course, the route is to bemarked on the map with a dashed purple line in accordance with the mapping
specification. The line may be interrupted where it obscures important map detail.
The route is also to be marked on the ground at the path junctions and at intervals
between them.
MODIFYING EXISTING MAPS
It is possible to survey and draw a new map especially for a TrailO competition andthis is the natural inclination of most mappers. But this may not be best in terms oftime, effort and cost. If the TrailO competition terrain is only a small fraction of thetotal mapped area, it may be more sensible to simply modify an existing map aroundthe control sites. The existing map may have benefitted from the increased precisionof laser contouring, in which case the contour adjustment and other changes to themap in the vicinity of the sites should be made without difficulty. If the existing map isolder and less perfect in terms of contouring, there may be an understandable
inclination by the mapper to ‘start from scratch’ with a new map. However, it might bepossible to modify the map by reconciling the laser contouring with the existing
contouring around the control sites. Although many, perhaps most, mappers may be
uncomfortable with such a compromise, it is only they who are aware of the hybrid
nature of such a map, the competitors concentrating on the control sites will only see
perfection! The harsh economic reality of trail orienteering competition often demands
the most cost-effective method of producing the required high quality map.
The compromises in using a FootO map for TrailO mapping are not just about
contouring. Other features can be involved. The FootO mapper may be concerned
when the requested changes conflict with the standard adopted across the wholemap. For example, if the smallest boulder mapped is 1.5 m high because there are somany in the terrain, the mapper may be reluctant about specially mapping 1.0 mboulders at TrailO control sites. The solution is to persuade the mapper that thisrequirement is for a one-off special version of the map for this competition only, andthe map file can be archived after the competition.
MAGNETIC NORTH
Since precision compass bearings (see Position Fixing in the next section) may
potentially be taken at any control site, it is essential that the features at all sites are
mapped so that their bearings are consistent with the magnetic north lines on the map.
Remember that quite small lateral distances in the position of an object or the pointfrom which a bearing is taken can change the bearing by several degrees:

It is also important that magnetic north is generally correct across the rest of the map
used for the course. If competitors notice significant magnetic discrepancies, they

10

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------may lose confidence in the map, even though the control sites that demand precisioncompass use may have been carefully surveyed for that purpose.
The potential for general misalignment in magnetic north has increased in recent
years due to the use of maps revised from old bases and also the greatly increased
rate of change of magnetic variation now occurring.
Although precision compass bearings may be used in mapping and planning, suchaccuracy should not be demanded of competitors, for whom the standard orienteering
compass is sufficient.
Maps in this document
The map segments in the following pages are for illustrative purposes and aremodified extracts from competition maps and solution sheets. The latter show
individual flag positions and a decision point. Most are at a scale of about 1:2500.

4. POSITION-FIXING TECHNIQUES
Trail orienteering is all about position-fixing: position-fixing on the map and positionfixing in the terrain. There are several position-fixing techniques in elite trail
orienteering. Some of these are well-established classic orienteering techniques usedin FootO and are labelled as such. The others are more recent developments in map
reading and terrain interpretation particular to TrailO.

Position at a mapped feature (Classic)
This is the basic form of precision-fixing of a control position at or next to a mappedfeature, which can be identified in the terrain. At advanced level identification may be
more difficult due to complexity and variability of the features, in that some aremapped and some are not.
Example: A map reading exercise, simple on the map
but complicated in the terrain by small unmappedfeatures and visibility restricted by vegetation.
The red dots represent control flags.
The task for this kind of problem is to locate the correctfeature, not to specify the exact location of the flag on thefeature.

11

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Position by contouring (Classic)
This is an advanced form of precision position-fixing which requires skill and practice.
It is the tracing across the ground of a contour or form line from a selected reference
point on the map. The reference point may be a feature at the same height as thecontour or it may be between features at different heights. To position by contouringwith accuracy needs a good sense of horizontal level in structured and sloping terrain.

Example: In this case the contour line passes through the
nearby boulder which, once identified, is a good reference
point for tracing the contour across the ground. Of the two
flags nearest to the boulder both were possible selections
but the contour traced through one flag, with the correct
flag being slightly higher up and on the centre line of the
spur.

Position by sighting lines
This is an advanced form of precision fixing which can be very accurate. The
technique is to identify two or more reference points on the map that line up with afeature on the map. Locating these ‘leading marks’ in the terrain and sighting along
the line(s) between them leads to the feature. This may be the control point at thecentre of the circle or another feature.
Example: The spur system lying across the control circle
was stepped so that there were two separated spurs
within the circle, giving the control description ‘E spur, NW
part’. Once the general area of the centre of the circle
was identified, the boulders acting as leading marks weresighted across to identify the centre of the circle, which
had a flag.
As a distractor an incorrect flag also had leading markboulders.

Sighting lines that do not lead directly to a mapped feature can also be useful when
they pass to one side of the feature. This can help with identification of the feature,
aided by estimating the distance by which the line ‘misses’ the feature and transferring
this distance to the terrain.
It is essential that all features which could reasonably be used as leading marks
are correctly positioned on the map.

12

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Position by compass bearing
The standard orienteering protractor compass may be used to transfer a direction fromthe map to the terrain. This is not as precise as the techniques listed above but canbe useful for correctly planned control problems. It is important not to demand too
high a precision, otherwise competitors would be unnecessarily encouraged to use
sophisticated surveying compasses.
Wheelchair users concerned about the magnetic effect of their wheelchairs may preferan eye-level sighting compass to take bearings.
For precision compass problems, the following guides should be met:
Bearing estimation should not be required to better than 5o.
(TG 3)

When taking bearings of flags from a suitable sighting point, which canbe accurately fixed on the map (not necessarily the same as the decision
point), the control point flag/position and adjacent flags should not beless than 5o apart in bearing.
(TG 3a)For precision compass controls the planner must check that the positional accuracy offeatures on the map must make it possible for the 5 degree requirement to be met:

Example: From the decision point (marked with x)
the flags were less than 5o apart in bearing. The
track junction, although at a good angle for
maximising the angular separation of the flags, wastoo broad to act as a precise reference point.
However, the nearby boulder, added as a map
correction, was suitable. The bearing identified two
flags but only one was on the centre line of the spur,as circled on the map.
Note. Although the ‘precision bearing’ problem isdesigned to be solvable with a standard orienteering compass, it is good practice forthe planner, when setting the flag positions, to use a more precise sighting compass tominimise aggregate competitor plus planner error.

Position by distance estimation
1. Into the terrain (range)
The estimation of distance off the tracks into the terrain can be used in control
problems to distinguish between features sufficiently separated in range. It is not a
precision technique. The following guide should be observed:

13

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Distance in range into the terrain estimated by competitors should not be
required to an accuracy better than 25%.
(TG 4)

This figure includes any map error. For problems requiring range estimation, the map
should be accurate to better than 10%.
Example: The two small, single symbol, boulder fields(ISSOM symbol 208) each contained a prominent
boulder, which could be interpreted as the mapped pairwith a flag between. The correct pair, unflagged, were
further away at an additional distance more than 25%of the distance to the false control. The answer was‘zero’.
The range estimated answer was confirmed by reference
to other features.

Estimation of distance from the observer (range) should be used with caution across‘dead ground’. This is ground which falls out of sight for part of the distance.
2. Across the terrain (bearing)
Estimation of small distances across the field of view in the terrain can sometimes beachieved by using the control makers as measuring aids. The control flags have
30cm squares and are usually suspended from a stake/pole/rod of 1m height. For IOF
competition it is good practice for the planner to use the same height equipment
throughout and announce that height to the competitors.
Estimation of larger distances across the field of view at a particular range can beassisted if there are features on the map at that range, which can be used as acalibration. If no such mapped features are available a possible alternative ismeasuring distance along the track and transferring this into the terrain. Distancealong the tracks can be measured by pace counting or wheel turns, for those in wheel
chairs, provided the track is reasonably flat and not too rough. In this case a better
accuracy than by eye can be achieved. The guide is:Distance estimation by pacing should not be required to better than 15%.
(TG 5)
Measurement of distance along a track by pacing is normally from an identifiablefeature on the map. A much more testing form is when there is no mapped reference
point, as in the following example:

14

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example: This is a particularly difficult contour problem
solved by distance estimation along the track. The
feature was a long, low hill with its highest point offset
from the centre. The length of the form line marking theupper part of the hill was measured on the map. This
length was determined by pacing its distance along the
track from an arbitrary feature not on the map. Thisdistance was then fitted to the hill to locate the form line
and fix the flag positions.

Use of rough techniques for approximate position-fixing
The use of rough compass bearings may assist in the identification of ‘which of
several’ features is relevant to the control problem.
There may also be usefulness in rough contouring. This is not exactly the same as
contouring; there might be several contours that all together create a shaped featurethat the competitor should be able to locate in the terrain.

Use of position-fixing problems in Planning
Whilst all the above position-fixing techniques are available to planners of elitecompetition, in areas of classic orienteering terrain it is expected that the ‘classic’techniques of contour and feature recognition will predominate, perhaps with someexamples of the other plotting techniques to add variety and interest.
In areas with limited classic terrain detail elite competition can still be planned, but with
the non-‘classic’ techniques predominating.
It is important for planners to note that competitors will consider several different(possibly all) fixing techniques in solving a control and these should lead to the sameanswer. This is discussed further for planners and competitors in Section 7 Moreways than one to the solution.

15

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. CONTROL SPECIFICATIONThe key to all trail orienteering competition is accurately locating in the terrain thecentre of the circle on the map, as described in the control description.
Planners need to take care that they do not demand too high a precision from thecompetitors. Whilst planners and mappers can fix the centre of a circle to better than
0.1mm (by enlarging the map on the screen), competitors should not be required tojudge better than 0.5mm on the map.
Since current mapping technology results in the circles on the maps being precisely
located, the following IOF definitions apply:The control position is defined by the centre of the circle on the map
together with the control description.
(TG 6)

The control description shall correctly describe the control position.
(TG 7)



If more than one description can be used for the control, the one which
offers the most precise position shall normally be preferred. (TG 8)

The control circles on the map are 6.0 mm in diameter. The circles are broken where
essential detail would otherwise be obscured. They are also broken where adjacentcontrol circles overlap.
If control sites are close together in very detailed areas and the above procedures give
unacceptably fragmented course markings, then 4.0 mm diameter circles may be
exceptionally used in the congested areas on the map. The pre-event details shallinform if this is so.
The centres of the control circles should be placed on the map with the best accuracy
available, typically to 0.1mm.

CONTROL SELECTION
At elite level the controls need to be both varied and of high quality. In general, thismeans the use of detailed terrain features primarily of land form and rock, but also
water and vegetation, as used in classic foot orienteering. Man-made features, suchas buildings and fences, tend to be less acceptable, but may be used sparingly to add
variety to the overall courses.
In principle, controls may be placed on, or in association with, any feature marked on
the map, subject to certain constraints:

16

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Given adequate visibility into the terrain, the controls may be set inaccordance with accepted orienteering convention on any feature marked
on the map, provided the centre of the circle can be determined by use of
position-fixing techniques and the control feature can be correctly
described.
(TG 9)

Adequate visibility refers to being able to sight the control from the decision point andany other necessary viewing points, in particular for users of low level wheelchairs.
Accepted orienteering convention refers to procedures for selecting controls in trail
orienteering, which are mostly derived from traditional foot orienteering convention,
but with some differences. Where these conventions affect control position selection,
it is necessary to understand the reasoning behind them.
The most important convention concerns contour line features, such as re-entrants
and spurs. Where these are represented by a single contour the map cannot show
the full extent of the feature so the convention is that the control is restricted to being
within the curve of the contour. However, if the feature is represented on the map by
more than one contour or form line, then there is better indication of its extent, so thearea acceptable for control selection is significantly increased. These concepts areshown in the diagrams:

Note that the two curved contours in the second diagram, if without a form line,
may represent two separate features, upper and lower in Column C of thedescription, as in the third diagram.
An important difference between FootO and TrailO practices, which needs to beunderstood, concerns linear features. Linear features that do not have a bend or
corner to define position can invite controversy, if used in FootO, but can be used inTrailO, if reference to other features allows precise location of a point on the linear
feature. See example in later section: ’Examples of flag position and description’.
However, such problems are not often used at elite level, because higher quality
problems are usually available. If not, a linear feature control can make an acceptableelite problem.
A further important difference between the two disciplines is that, when selecting froma group of similar features (say, boulders), TrailO planners are not restricted to the
middle boulder or, for example, the northernmost boulder. If it is possible for others in17

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------the group to be precisely located by reference to other features, the description‘boulder’ is acceptable (See TG 11 below).

CONTROL DESCRIPTION
Reference: International Specification for Control Descriptions, IOF 2004.
There are some differences in use and interpretation of control descriptions between
federations. The conventions used for IOF events are as given below.
The control descriptions used in IOF trail orienteering are the same as those for footorienteering, as given in the reference. In particular, compound descriptions for the
position of the control (Column G), which require more than one symbol are notpermitted in current practice. Therefore:The position of the control flag is described by a single symbol (or none)in Column G.
(TG 10)Since the development of accurate circle printing has made redundant the earlier
practice of the description needing to be unique, it follows that:

The control description may correctly apply to more than one flag.
(TG 11)

Using precision position fixing, the control point, with or without a flag, is determined
without the need for any modified interpretation of the description:


The convention for a direction description (such as NW part), where morethan one flag fits the description, that the flag furthermost in that
direction is the correct one does NOT apply in IOF TrailO competition.
(TG 12)

Examples of the description correctly applying to more than one flag are:
1. Area feature
Description: ‘Clearing N part’.
The red dots show the position of the two flags.
Both flags fit that description, but the circle iscentred on the southern of the two, and fixed
by reference to other features.
The low hill draws attention to the correct flagbut it can be precisely fixed by sighting lines
from two pairs of boulders.

18

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2. Extended linear (or narrow area) feature
Description: ‘Hill’At first sight the two middle flags fit the description, whichis the centre of the hill. This could not be easily identified
in the terrain because of restricted visibility. However,precision compass from the path junction to the west
clearly indicated the required flag, confirmed by sighting
along the hill as being on the W side of the path.

Difficulties can arise with describing control positions with respect to contour features(particularly re-entrants and spurs) where the contour lines, as discussed above, do
not represent the limits of the feature, although they may appear to do so on the map.
The following procedure should be observed:The description should take note of the visible extent of the feature in theterrain as well as its representation within the circle on the map.
(TG 13)This may be seen in the following examples:
If the terrain shows, as the map suggests, a continuous
single re-entrant, with no steps in the slope, extending
across more than one contour line, although only one iswithin the circle, the correct description is ‘re-entrant,
lower part’.
The direction description ‘eastern part’ does not apply inthis example because the control is on the centre line of
the re-entrant (See later detailed example)

In this example of a very large and deep depression thecontrol point is in the SE part of the ring contour within thecircle. However, taking note of the full extent of the featureon the map and in the terrain, the correct description is‘Large depression, NW part’.
Similar convention applies to hills with several contour
rings.

19

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Examples such as these, in which the feature extends well outside the circle andmodifies the description, need a common-sense approach by the planner and event
advisor.

THE POSITION OF THE FLAG (COLUMN G DESCRIPTION)
The placing of flags and the description of their positions has developed into a precise
set of terms, which needs careful understanding to avoid confusion with the general,
less precise, use in everyday English.
In particular, the differences between the everyday descriptions of hill features andorienteering terms could lead to confusion:In everyday English usage the ‘side’ of a hill is commonly understood to be allof the slope between top and bottom.

Additionally a description also cannot be used in situations where it has twomeanings. For example, the ‘top’ of a hill in everyday English can mean boththe uppermost area of the hill and its highest point. The term ‘top’ is best
avoided for hills in elite orienteering.

In the diagram above, the only orienteering description which agrees witheveryday use is foot. Elsewhere on the hill the description part is used (except
for no Column G description, which is the centre of the hill).

DEFINITION OF DESCRIPTIONS USED IN COLUMN G(Blank/None) – used for the middle of the feature. Additionally for rock faces, itmeans the middle of the foot.
SIDE – Used for features that rise up sharply from the ground (such as building,boulder, stone wall). The flag is positioned as close to the side of the feature as canbe achieved.

20

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------FOOT – Used for the edges of features that rise less steeply from the ground (such as
hill, knoll, spur). The flag is positioned, as best as can be judged, at the junction of theslope of the feature and the surrounding terrain.
EDGE – used for the edges of features at ground level (such as marsh, clearing) andthose below ground level (such as depression). If the edge of a feature cannot be
precisely fixed, the use of ‘part’ is preferred.
PART – used for any part of an area or linear feature which is not the centre or theedge or an end.
TOP – used for features where the normal flag position is at the base of the feature,e.g. rock face, where the top is at the mid-length of the feature.
BETWEEN – used for the mid-point of the shortest distance between the edges of two
features.
UPPER/LOWER – used for the upper and lower parts of the feature as existing in theterrain.
END – used to indicate the distinctive end of a linear feature. The orientation of thesymbol, in one of the eight compass directions, indicates in plan view the orientation of
the linear feature and its end.
BEND – used for a smooth change of direction of a linear feature.
CORNER (Inside & outside) – used for a sharp change of direction of a linear featureor the edge of an area feature. The angle enclosed by the directions each side of thecorner is between 45o and 135o. The orientation of the symbol indicates the directionof the corner in plan view.
TIP - used for a very sharp change of direction of a linear feature or the edge of anarea feature. The angle enclosed by the directions each side of the corner is less than
45o. The orientation of the symbol indicates the direction of the tip in plan view. The
flag is placed either on the tip or immediately outside the tip, as the symbol indicates.
BEARING – there are 8 permissible positions based on compass bearing:SE, S, SW, W, NW.

N, NE, E,

With some features, such as the elongated hill shown in the
diagram, not all eight compass directions can be used to describe
part. In this example only the NE and SW directions can be clearly
identified.
With more irregularly shaped features the direction may be identified by the ‘tangent’or ‘approaching front’ method. This is bringing a line, set at 90 degrees to the21

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------required direction, towards the feature. The point at which first contact is made is thefurthermost in that direction.

This awkwardly shaped hill shows the tangent method in use, giving three good
direction descriptions for part. The other five directions, in this example, are lesssatisfactory and best not used.
More complete definitions of these descriptions are given in the International
Specification for Control Descriptions, IOF 2004.
Use of these descriptions is illustrated in the following section and plan view diagrams.

EXAMPLES OF FLAG POSITION AND DESCRIPTIONIn the diagrams the sections are W to E, looking N. The plan views are conventional,
with N at the top of the page. The flags indicate permitted control positions – for azero control the flag would be absent.

Depression
If there is no description in Column
G, the control flag is placed in the centre of thedepression. Note that the lowest part is notnecessarily the centre.
If the description is part, the control flag isplaced sufficiently removed from the centre
and the edge so as not to be confused withthem, and also such that its direction can be
distinguished from adjacent directions.
If there is a distinct edge, the control flag may
be so placed and described as edge. Again,
its direction must be clearly distinguishable
from adjacent directions.
22

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pit
The same arrangements apply as for ‘depression’ above. Pits, having steeper sides
than depressions, are more likely to have clear edges. For small pits, control flag
positions are the centre and edge. For large pits the ‘part’ description may be used.

Erosion gully
A wide erosion gully can have a section across its width similar to that for a large pit
and control flags may be placed across the gully in similar manner. A narrow gully, aswith a narrow re-entrant (see below), has flag positions only along its centre line.
However, flags may also be placed along its edge, if distinct.
Since gullies have longitudinal dimension, it is necessary to fix the control flag
positions by reference to other features. Also, as gullies run down slopes,
descriptions ‘upper part’ and ‘lower part’ may apply, in similar manner to re-entrants.

Hill
If there is no description in Column
G, the control flag is placed at the centre of
the hill. Note that the highest point is notnecessarily at the centre. The description‘top’ is not used.
If the description is part, the flag is placed
sufficiently distant from thecentre and the foot so as not to be
confused with them, and also suchthat its direction is clear.
If the contour marks a distinct foot, the control
point may be placed there and described as
foot, with direction indication.
If the contour ring does not represent thebase of the hill (as in the two lower planviews), a distinct foot may be some distanceaway and cannot be used as a control, unlessa form line is added. The description is theneither ‘Hill, foot’ or ‘Spur, foot, depending on
how the form line is drawn.

23

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Re-entrant
The diagram shows a narrow re-entrant shownby a single contour line. Without any indicationon the map of the extent of the re-entrant in theterrain, other than just this single contour, theconvention is that the defined area of the reentrant is within the curve of the contour.
Control positions may only be set within thisdefined area. In this case the midpoint along
the centre line passing through the re-entrant is
described as ‘Re-entrant’. Control positions
along the centre line above this point (upperhalf) are described as ‘Re-entrant, upper part’
and positions along the centre line below
this point (lower half) are described as‘Re-entrant, lower part’.
However, if the re-entrant in the terrain
extends well beyond the limits of thecontour line, these descriptions of thecontrol positions within the defined areaof the contour may not agree with thoseof the feature in the terrain.
In such cases it is necessary for theextent of the re-entrant to be more fully
shown on the map with more than one
contour line or form lines. This allows its
defined area to be greatly increased andmost of its extent may be used for control
positions and described appropriately.
As shown in the second diagram thecentre line passing through the complete feature in the terrain is split into three parts.
The centre of the circle may be placed within the upper third and described as ‘reentrant, upper part’, within the middle part and described by ‘re-entrant’ and within thelower part and described by ‘re-entrant, lower part’. The correct flag must still beplaced in the centre of the circle. This ‘rule of thirds’ applies only to features extending
over several contour/form lines.
The descriptions match the appearance of the feature in the terrain, not just that partwithin the control circle. The control description may correctly apply to more than one
flag and the control point is located by reference to the contour/form lines and/or otherfeatures.
Narrow re-entrants approximate to linear features and, as indicated, control positions
are down the centre line.
24

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------It is necessary, when viewing in the terrain a re-entrant which is indicated on the mapwith more than one contour/form line, to determine whether the re-entrant is a single
continuous feature or is stepped to give two or more separate re-entrants along thesame line.
A wide re-entrant is an area feature andcontrols may be positioned off the centre line
and given a direction description. The
diagram shows control positions in the NE, E
and SE parts of the re-entrant. Other positionsin the NW, W and SW parts are also possible(and along the centre line).
Any control position so described is permitted
provided the flag is clearly within the defined
extent of the re-entrant and sufficiently
separated from the centre line to avoid
confusion with centre line descriptions.
Again, selection of the correct flag among
more than one with the same description is byreference to the contour line and/or other features.

Spur
Similar criteria apply to spurs as for re-entrants.
The diagram shows a continuous narrow spur
depicted by a single contour line and two formlines. The extent of the spur in the terrain isshown by the broken blue line. The lower formline is at the foot of the spur in the terrain. The
whole extent of the spur may be used for control
positions, provided the form lines are on themap.
On a narrow spur the permitted control positions
are down the centre line.
The foot of a spur refers to its furthest extension
down the terrain and a number of control
positions around the foot are permitted, as in the
diagram.
For wide spurs the same principles apply as for wide re-entrants and controls may bepositioned off the centre line and given a direction description.
Since the control description may apply to more than one flag, the control point islocated by reference to the contour line and/or other features.

25

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Terrace
A terrace is an area of flat ground in sloping terrain. A common form arises from the
excavation of material from the slope and bringing it forward to make a flat area forcharcoal burning or other purposes.
The diagram shows this form, which canbe regarded as a flat-topped wide spur.
The whole extent of the flat top, termed
terrace, may be used for control positions,provided the upper form line is on themap. The lower form line shows the footof the feature and this is referred to as
spur foot.
The diagram shows control flag positionsin the N, NE, E, SE and S parts of theterrace. Other flag positions are possible.
These have direction descriptions. The
centre flag has no description.
The control flags at the foot of the spur are positioned at the foot in the terrain. This isseparate from the contour line in this example which marks the edge of the flat area
further up the slope. If used for a control, the foot must be marked with a form line.

Rock face
Flags at the foot of a cliff /rock face are placed as close
to the foot as can be achieved. If there are difficulties infixing the flag stakes, they may be set a short distanceaway from the foot but not so far as to raise thepossibility of a zero answer.
Tip: Flags which have to be positioned a short distancefrom the rock face, or any other feature, may have theirstakes tilted towards the feature.
The flag with no Column G description is placed at the
mid-length foot. The length of the rock face includes
bends and steps, if mapped. The length of the rockface in the diagram is (a + b). Minor steps and offsets,
which are not mapped, are not included.
Flags may be positioned at other places along the rockface foot, and described as ‘part’. Also, ‘end’ may be
used, provided the map shows the whole length of therock face.

26

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A flag may be positioned at the rock face top at mid-length and described by the ‘top’
symbol; it is not necessarily at the highest point. .
Note that, under current rules, no other flags are permitted along the top of the rockface, because double descriptions would be needed to identify them.

QuarryA rock face, conventionally mapped, is a linear feature. A rock face that is not straight
but has convex form, such as that in the previous diagram, remains a linear feature.
However, if the form is concave and sufficiently extended, it can become an area
feature.
This is shown in the two diagrams. That on the left is still a linear rock face and offers
flag placements similar to the previous example. The diagram on the right shows therock face enclosing an area, now termed quarry.

Flag positions additional to those marked are possible.

Earthbanks
Also known as steep slopes, earthbanks which have a well defined foot and top,
together with well defined ends can be treated the same as rock face and quarry
above.

Boulder
Control flags placed around the boulder are
positioned as close to the base of theboulder as possible and given a direction
description.
Flags are normally placed around a boulder
but may be positioned on the boulder. A
flag placed on a boulder in the middle

27

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------position has no Column G description. For very large boulders the description ‘part’
may be used.
If the upper part of a boulder, above flag height, projects further than its base, theprojecting part is ignored for ‘side’ controls.

Building
Control flags may be placed round the foot of a building at the
mid-length of a projecting side (i.e. that which is furthest in agiven direction) or at outside and inside corners. The
descriptions are ‘side’ and ‘corner’.
In the diagram the two faces of the building forming the inset
cannot be described and therefore cannot be used, apart fromthe inner corner.
Where an upper part of a building projects further than its foot, the projecting part isignored (as with boulder).

Watercourse
If Column G is blank, the control flag
position is in the centre of thewatercourse.
If the watercourse is wide, other flag
positions within the watercourse arepossible and the description ‘part’ in agiven direction applies.
Control positions at the water edge are also possible. If the bank is at a shallow
angle, the flag may be placed exactly at the water edge. If the bank is vertical so thatthe flag cannot be placed at the water edge, it may be placed at the top of the bank,as close as possible to the edge.
An advantage of using the top of a steep bank is that this flag position and description
does not change if the water level rises and falls significantly.
Since a watercourse has linear dimension, unless at a precisely positioned irregularity,
the flag positions have to be determined by reference to other features (See also
Linear features, later)

Vegetation boundary
Care needs to be taken with vegetation boundaries. A distinct vegetation boundary,such as a forest edge adjacent to open land or an obvious change within the forestfrom broadleaf to coniferous trees, is mapped, according to IOF practice, in aerial plan28

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------view. The boundary at ground level is located directly under the edge or meeting of
the canopy vegetation.
Use of such a vegetation boundary in elite trail orienteering is not recommended
because of difficulties in fixing the line of the vegetation boundary on the ground,particularly with the high canopies of mature trees. Even if the canopy is low, as in thesecond diagram, it may not be possible for sufficient sighting possibilities along andacross the boundary to fix the control position precisely. Exceptionally, if these
possibilities do exist, such a vegetation boundary problem may be considered.
On the other hand, when the vegetation extends to the ground or almost to theground, as in the first diagram, there is no difficulty.

Note that, for the terrain within the trees
to be mapped runnable white, theclearance under the canopy should be
2m or more.

Overhangs
Similarly to runnable forest the clearance
underneath building overhangs should be 2m or
more in order to be mapped with the grey
symbol. The mapped footprint should represent
the main structure. Here the balconies havebeen included but should not feature in flagplacement.
Roof projections, unless very large, should be
ignored.

29

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Point features
These are ‘small’ features where the size of thesymbol on the map represents a greater area
than the actual dimension of the feature in theterrain. Examples are boulders, knolls andsmall depressions/pits. Note that even thesmall distinct boulder symbol (ISSOM symbol206) is equivalent to a diameter of 3 m on the
ground.

Where there is no Column G description, the control flag is at the centre of the feature.
Otherwise the flags are positioned round the feature, as partly illustrated in the
diagram, using direction descriptions as follows: Boulder - ‘side’ Knoll- ‘foot’ Pit- ‘edge’Since the map symbol is larger than the feature, positioning the centre of the circle on
the control position cannot be precise. The convention in TrailO is that,with point features, the circle is centred on the feature symbol and notoffset in the direction of a flag on the side or edge of the feature.
(TG 14)

Here is an example with a Boulder NE side control:

Irregular point features
Irregularly shaped point features sometimes offer micro positioning of flags withdifferent direction descriptions. If the shape of the feature allows adjacent directions
to be clearly identified from one or more viewing positions, then the problem is
acceptable, but caution should be exercised with such micro-precision.
Here is a permissible example of a suitably aligned boulder, with closely positioned
but differently described flags on its SW side:30

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Individual trees
Distinctive trees, in open land or in the forest, may bemapped with a point symbol (usually green circle). In thiscase the symbol represents the trunk of the tree. The flagplacements are the same as with the boulder example
above. The flags are placed as close to the trunk of the tree
as possible.

Single trees in open land and mapped only by the extent of
their canopy are shown as area features and cannot be
used unless re-mapped as point symbols.

Linear features
In foot orienteering linear features can only be used for flag placement if the feature
has a clearly identifiable end or change of direction. In trail orienteering, position fixing
from nearby features may allow other parts of the linear feature to be used.

31

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Note that a fence corner is a precise position and self-defining but a fence bend is anextended linear feature, which may be compact enough to be used in FootO, but
requires additional description in TrailO: e.g. ‘fence’, ‘bend’, ‘side’. Double Column G
descriptions are currently not permitted. A possible solution is to omit the description‘bend’, referring only to ‘fence’.

Linear not-to-scale features
Straightforward examples are paths, streams, ditches, small erosion gullies, etc where
the symbol on the map is wider than the feature in the terrain.
In all of these the control circle is positioned on the centre line of the symbol, and notdisplaced in the direction of the flag, if positioned to the side (e.g. path) or to the edge
(e.g. stream).
More complicated are rock faces and earth banks, which require special attention.
A rock face may be represented on the map by a single black line or a black line withconventional tags to show the direction of the face. The conventional tags are ignored(even though they may equate to the actual extent of the rock face in plan view) andthe control circle is centred on the black line.
Sometimes a large rock face has considerable lateral extent and is represented by athick base-line with extended tags. It is then considered an area feature and thecontrol circles are placed in actual map position.

The same procedures apply to earthbank symbols with tags.

32

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Between
The ‘between’ description refers to themid point of the shortest imaginary line
joining the ‘edges’ of two features (notthe centres).
When setting ‘between’ problems
using contour line and/or form linefeatures, it is important to check thatthe contours and form lines on themap have been drawn to represent theactual edge or foot of the features. If
necessary, form lines must be added
to define the edge/foot.
In the case of point features whose map symbols are larger than the objects they are
depicting, such as boulders and knolls, the actual edges of the features in the terrain
are used in defining the separating distance.
In the example, ‘Between the boulder and hill’, the diagram shows the correct position
for the flag in the terrain.
Marking the position of the centre of the circle on the map depends on whether thefeatures are to scale or not.
For mapped-to-scale features the control circle on the map is simply positioned at its
correct location in the terrain. For two point features the circle is positioned at the midpoint between the centres of the mapped points (but see the variation below). For
combinations of point and to scale features (as in the example) the circle is centred
between the centre of the point feature and the edge of the mapped-to-scale feature.

Variation. It is possible, with angled
point features such as the elongatedknolls in the diagram, for the mid-point
and the actual position of the flag in theterrain to be different. In such cases,
practical sense should prevail and thecircle should be centred on the flag
position."

Use of other positions along the line requiring two Column G symbols (such as‘Between, NE part’) is not recommended at this time. However, controls may be sitedat the ends of the line and described in association with the adjacent feature (e.g.
Boulder, NE side).
33

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For good control setting it is necessary to set limits on the separation of between
features and how they are described:


Only features within or partly within the circle shall be used for setting
problems using the ‘between’ description.
(TG 15)

The Column C direction description should identify which two features ofseveral within the control circle form the ‘between’ pair.
(TG 16)

These recommendations are illustrated in this example of a multiple ‘between’ control
from the model event at WTOC 2004.

A

B C

D E F

G H

Column C describes which pair of the features in Columns D and E within the circle
defines the control. Having, in this case, identified the northern pair of boulders, thecontrol is positioned, according to Column G, at the mid-point between them. This isvery clear and complies with the IOF International Specification for Control
Descriptions 2004.

SaddleCare needs to be exercised with‘saddle’ (also known as ‘col’), whichis the lowest point on a ridge
between spurs. The lowest point is
not necessarily midway between thecontours.
A saddle control may not be of
sufficient difficulty for elitecompetition (unless one of many in acomplex area) as the lowest point
can be easy to determine. Between
the contours may offer a better
problem.

34

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------DESCRIPTIONS – GOOD PRACTICE
In general, descriptions should not be more detailed than is necessary for the viewingof the problem from the decision point.
It is possible for some controls to have more than one valid description. Where one
description is preferred, it should be used, but the others are acceptable and do notinvalidate the control.
It is also reasonable practice to allow some variation in descriptions, where this does
not critically affect the identification of the correct flag. The essentials of good trail
orienteering are skilful map reading and terrain interpretation, and not over-precisionin control description.
Where misdescription of a control in competition is thought to be critical in the solutionof a problem, this can be tested by the complaints and protest procedures. But,
particularly, for features mapped to scale:

A control flag which is correctly placed in accordance with the centre of
the circle on the map, but wrongly described, must NOT result in a zeroanswer.
(TG 17)For point features, the absence of a flag at the described position can give a valid zeroanswer.

OVERLAPPING CONTROLSIt is permitted for flags visible from more than one control decision point to be part ofthe problems set at those decision points, unless excluded by tapes laid in the terrain.

THE ‘A’ CONTROL
It is now common practice in elite competition to have the single flag problem (answer
A or Zero), identified in Column B of the description with just the single letter ‘A’. Suchcontrols have already been used in WTOCs.
The early use of the single ‘A’ control had only one flag visible from the viewing point.
Current practice allows more than one flag to be visible.
Competitors are required to identify the circled and described feature in the terrain anddecide whether there is a flag in the correct position or not, without being excessively
distracted by other flags that might be visible from the viewing point.

35

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Note that, with ‘A’ controls, it is not necessary to lay tapes in the terrain. Tapes are
only needed with ‘A-B, A-C, etc. controls in the presence of other visible flags, so thatthe flags for the control being analyzed can be identified in the sequence A, B, C, etc.
To maintain quality of course setting with ‘A’ controls it is necessary to limit the
number of flags and the degree to which they can interfere with each other, thefollowing procedures are recommended:For each ‘A’ control there is only one flag, which is either correctly
placed at the feature (A) or incorrectly placed at the feature (Z) or placedon a feature nearby (Z).
(TG 18)

It is permissible for markers from other ‘A’ or multi-flag (eg. A-C)
controls to be visible from the ‘A’ control viewing point.
(TG 19)For any ‘A’ control, flags other than the ‘A’ control flag may bepositioned within the ‘A’ control circle, but must not be on features
similar to the control feature.
(TG 20)A set of ‘A’ controls grouped together, viewed from one or more viewing points, istermed an ‘A’ Cluster.
The principles of ‘A’ control setting are shown in the following example:

This example shows a cluster of ‘A’ controls (1-5) with an overlapping conventional control (6)nearby.

36

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The area contains a total of 8 marker flags, one for each of the five ‘A’ controls and three forthe conventional control.
All 5 ‘A’ controls are viewed in this example from a common viewing point (but separate
viewing points could be used.
#1. ‘A’ control. Spur, upper part – marker flag correct (A)#2. ‘A’ control. Spur, upper part – no flag (Z). The flag is on the spur to the east.
#3. ‘A’ control. Re-entrant – flag correct (A). Note that the Control 2 flag is close but on aclearly different feature.
#4. ‘A’ control. Re-entrant – no flag (Z). The flag is in the next re-entrant to the SW.
#5. ‘A’ control. Hill – Flag correct (A). The flags for Control 6 to the NE can be seen from thecluster viewing point. They are on similar features but, since they are outside the Control 5
circle, they are not interfering. Had a Control 6 flag been placed on the east hill inside theControl 5 circle, it would interfere and not be acceptable.
#6. ‘A-D’ control. Hill, NE foot. Flag A is the answer. Note that the Control 5 flag is visible
from the Control 6 viewing point and is then the 4th flag for that control. Alternatively, it could
be taped off and the problem is then A-C.

LONG DISTANCE CONTROLSLong distance controls with larger features make potential valid control
sites provided the marker flags are clearly visible and will remain soduring the course of the competition when light conditions may change.
An acceptable solution is to increase the flag visibility by using two
standard flags hung one above the other on the same stake.
Individual increased size flags are not recommended.
If a control has flags at short and long distances, it is not necessary to
double flag all flag positions, just those at long range.
Double flagging may also be used where there is poor visibility, such as flags in deep
shadows viewed across brightly lit ground.

37

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONTROL FLAG HEIGHT
It is important that flags are hung at the sameheight in a control cluster where the height of theground is significant but difficult to judge– on thefar side of a hill, for example, where the groundlevel is not visible but assessed from the flagheight. The example shows that Flags A and C
are at the same height and on the contour. Flag
B is higher up the hill.
It is recommended that flags are hung with the top of the flag 1m above
the ground. The flag is then useful for judging the height of features,
particularly relevant for those features that have a threshold height forbeing mapped. Examples are boulders and rock faces, which, if
mapped exactly to specification, will not be shown if less than 1m high.
Flags can also be used for the estimation of small horizontal distances,using the apparent width of the flag as a guide. This does not varymuch, between 26 and 30cm, depending on the rotation of the flag,

6. ZERO ANSWERS
The underlying reason for most dissent in trail orienteering is the existence of the zero
control leading to the argument that, unless the flag is exactly in the right position, it isin the wrong position – zero! But how exact is exact? Debate about that continues.
The zero answer, no marker flag at the centre of the control circle on the map, is afeature of elite trail orienteering. Its use adds an extra dimension to control problem
setting but also introduces increased difficulties with marker flag placement. This isbecause a minor misplacement, real or imagined, of the correct marker could wrongly
be interpreted as a zero answer.
It may be thought desirable to state a distance or a percentage distance, beyond
which a misplacement is deliberate. It is not technically possible to give an overall
figure, as this depends on the terrain type, control feature and mapping accuracy.
Providing separate figures for each control is technically possible but would require
additional information in the description. This is not permitted under present Council
guidance and Rules Commission instruction that TrailO and FootO descriptions should
remain as current without further divergence.
However, research on the subject of tolerance for correct placement of flags and its
implication for missing flags and zero answers continues and is likely to be discussed
in a future Technical Note.

38

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------The solution is to ensure that zero answers are clear. Either the centre of the circle
with no flag should be clearly identifiable or the flags can be located and shown to bein positions clearly not at the circle centre. It is important to avoid small deliberate
offsets in flag position planned as a zero answer which could be misinterpreted bycompetitors as being the result of sloppiness in placement and thus non zero.
There are two types of zero answer problem
Zero answers at non-flagged features:
There is no flag at the feature as defined by the centre of the circle and the control
description. A useful form is the use of parallel features in which a section of terrain isnear identical to a nearby section. Flags are carefully placed to represent a legitimate
problem but the control circle is in the parallel terrain nearby. This form of problem
can be surprisingly testing. Another common form is in complex terrain with many
flagged features matching the control description but the circled feature has no flag
This latter form is the type of zero answer problem most suitable for tempO controls.
Zero answers at flagged point features:
These are point features where there are flags, but that is not in the position describedby the control description. The possibility arises because, for point features, thecentre of the circle is centred on the map symbol, yet the flag position is offset. In
PreO this type of problem can be used down to quite small flag separations.
This type of problem, in its simplest form, may also be used in TempO competition

Zero answers at point features are acceptable in PreO competition to a
precision of minimum separation of 45o between directions (i.e. todistinguish between W and SW), provided that the feature can be sighted
in these directions(TG 24)



Zero answers at point features are acceptable in TempO competition but
only when there is a minimum separation of 135o between the flag
position and description.
(TG 25)A useful guide for competitors at zero answer controls which have been properly set isthat, if they are not sure it is zero, then it is probably not zero.

39

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

7. OTHER TECHNICAL CONSIDERATIONSTeamwork
The National Controller and IOF Event Adviser at WTOC (and similar officials at otherelite events) need to work with the Planner(s) and Mapper to produce unambiguous
control problems of high quality. The careful double-checking of every problem isessential for the success of the event.
Experience has shown that, if there is even a small mistake in the control setting or
something that could be misinterpreted, several competitors will be misled and selectthe wrong answer. These competitors may then argue that the control be voided (seelater in this section)
This section contains advice on how to avoid such difficulties.

The competitors’ viewpoint
Controllers act on behalf of the competitors when judging and correcting control sites
prepared by the Planner. This assessment must, initially and finally, be carried out
when viewing from the trails. As soon as controllers step into the terrain, they gain
additional information that is not available to the competitors. There are frequently
good reasons for accessing the terrain, adjusting the fine detail of the map to betterreflect that visible from the trail, for example.
It can be useful, if more that one controller is appointed to the competition, for one
controller not to enter the terrain when a control site is being adjusted, so as better tojudge from the competitors’ viewpoint.

How long is the course and what time is allowed?
A PreO course should not be too long. The shorter the course the greater proportionof the allowed time can be spent on solving the problems and there is a saving ofenergy on moving long distances, important for competitors with physical limitations.
If there is a long distance between controls an untimed break over that section is
worth considering. The maximum time should not exceed 2½ hours.
The time allowed depends on the number of controls and the length of the course.
The Rules give a simple base formula for a course which is reasonably flat and wellsurfaced:
Time required = 3 min per control + 3 min per 100 m
If the course is considered to have additional climb over normal practice, an allowanceof 3 minutes per 10 metres of additional climb may be added.

40

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In FootO normal practice is for the climb not to exceed 4% of the total distance. In
TrailO the following is recommended:
Additional climb in trail orienteering is that: in the Open class more than 2% of the course length,
 in the Paralympic class more than 1% of the course length,
The extra climb is awarded a time allowance of 3 minutes for each 10 metres ofheight.
(TG 21)
Example: 2 km course with 18 controls and 60m of climb has 20m extra climb forOpen class and 40m of extra climb for the Paralympic class
Time (Open class) = (3 x 18) + (3 x 2000/100) + (3 x 20/10)= 54 + 60 + 6= 120 minTime (Paralympic) = (3 x 18) + (3 x 2000/100) + (3 x 40/10)= 54 + 60 + 12
= 125 minThere may be other reasons for increasing the allowed time, particularly for wheelchaircompetitors on narrow, uneven or loose surface tracks.
The Event Advisor has the authority to make such allowances in accordance with theRules.
The target time can be set up to a rounded figure that facilitates the competitors’
calculations of their remaining times. For example, a 118 min time can be rounded up
to 120 min. Simplified arithmetic may be considered useful for competitors not given a
start time until they have cleared initial time controls.

More ways than one to the solution
Section 4 listed a number of position-fixing techniques. When a control problem isdesigned, there can be an intended best method of solution.
It may be that, of a number of alternative methods of solution, others have equal orclose merit. It is important that the second or any other method of solution that is avalid way of arriving at the answer is checked for consistency with the intended
method.
It is not realistic to expect maps in which every feature is perfectly represented inexactly its correct position with respect to all the other features. However,

the main features which could be used for valid solutions of eachproblem must be correctly related to each other.
(TG 22)

It is the responsibility of the planner to check that:41

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



If there is more than one valid way to solve a control problem, all should
give the same answer.
(TG 23)The competitor, when considering various methods of solution to a control problem,
may not be aware that there is an intended best solution and will think about using all
the methods. But they do not have equal importance in identifying the exact centre of
the control circle in the terrain.
The most accurate position fixing is associated with those features on the map whichin themselves, or combined with the description, lead to a precise point. These are
the point features, the small features mapped to scale and precise parts of larger
features. Examples are: boulder (with direction description), rock face (mid point foot)and forest corner.
Almost as accurate is position fixing by sighting lines. Although potentially very
accurate, as when viewing across a pair of boulders, there are difficulties when using
trees as leading marks and allowance has to be made for viewing to the side. The
technique can also be sensitive to mapping errors. If the point to be identified isbeyond the leading marks (extrapolation), then error in mapped position of the leading
marks is increased. If the point is between the leading marks (interpolation), any such
error is reduced.
A common difficulty with sighting lines is when there are too many! In areas such as
parkland with many individually marked trees or urban spaces with many buildings
there may be very many sighting line possibilities and it is likely that they will not all
agree. Such areas are best avoided but, if used, the most important sighting lines
should be identified and give a common answer.
The sighting lines have most merit when they intersect each other or cross a linear
feature at an angle at or close to 90 degrees. Those that intersect at a shallow angle
are most susceptible to error.
A very advanced sighting line use is when the line does not cross the control position
but is to one side. The skill then required is to estimate the offset on the map andjudge the equivalent distance in the terrain. Problems solved in this way have to bevery carefully set.
Less accurate but with potential for precise position fixing is the use of contouring. If
the contour can be located in position and height by reference to mapped features
then it may be traced with confidence. If not, or if there is some difficulty in viewing
the terrain, the traced contour may be subject to error.
Precision compass, despite the name, is inherently less precise for position fixing than
the above techniques. If used to select which of several identical features, it can leadindirectly to a very precise position. However, if used by itself to fix a position, that
position is approximate.

42

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Distance estimation across the direction of view can be reliably done if the range is not
great and/or there are visual clues for size. Least accurate is using distanceestimation in range. However, this technique can again be useful in distinguishing
between features at different ranges.
Elite competitors will consider all techniques in solving a control problem and,particularly if they do not all agree with each other, give priority to those likely to haveresulted in the most precise and accurate answer.
After the control position as described at the centre of the circle on the map has been
identified in the terrain, either precisely or approximately, the competitor can thenjudge whether a flag is in that position, or so near that it cannot be considered a zero
control.

Unmapped and part-mapped features
The mapping threshold for size of features for including them on the map can produce
problems, especially for linear features. The minimum height or depth of features tobe included on the map is given as 1m in the mapping specifications ISOM 2000 and
ISSOM 2006. The mapper may choose, if the terrain has too many features for clear
interpretation, to increase the threshold. Any changes from basic specification need to
be in the event details.
Terrain containing features where some are mapped and some are not, requires
careful inspection to distinguish between them but, once this is done, there should not
be too much difficulty for the competitor.
However, linear features which reduce in height can be much more problematic.
Consider the example of a rock face which is well above the mapping threshold of 1mat one end but reduces to below 1m at the other end. Only that part of the rock facewhich is 1m and above should be mapped. The planner needs to determine whether
this is the case and confirm that a competitor viewing the rock face from a distancecan correctly identify the mapped section (possibly by reference to the height of acontrol flag).
If the mapped end can be identified with reasonable certainty, then the following
control positions are usable:

43

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even if the mapped end of the rock face is identified at 1m height, its use as a control
point with the description ‘end’ is not recommended. However, the other flag
positions, as in the diagram, are permitted. Note that the positional uncertainty of the
mid-point of the mapped rock face is half that at the mapped end.
If the mapped end cannot be identified with reasonable certainty, then only thefollowing control positions are usable:

All flags to have meaning
Do not add marker flags simply to increase numbers in order to reduce the chance ofrandom selection being correct. At elite level flags which have no meaning are
instantly rejected. Each flag used should be positioned so that it has some definite
connection with the control description. The best incorrect flags are those which areright in several respects but wrong in one.
Caution should be exercised with ‘A’ flags that are well to the left of the main flagcluster. Such flags can lead to competitors identifying the correct flag but mistakenly
labelling it. If a well-to-the-left flag is used, it is essential that it is an initial viableoption with the correct description to give the flag legitimacy.

Decision point
The decision point is the position from which all flags can be seen and the decision
about which flag (A-E, or zero) marks the feature defined by the centre of the circle on
the map and the control description is made. The decision point is marked with aprominent stake to be readily visible and is identified with the number of the control.
The decision point is not marked on the competition map. If there is possibility for
doubt about its general location, the direction of view from the decision point towards
the control may be given in Column H of the control description.
In the interests of wheelchair users the decision point should not be located on a steep
slope.

44

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In addition to the decision point there are other unmarked viewing points from which
the flags can be seen and their relationship to the map and terrain determined.
The recording point (either a pin punch for marking a competitor’s control card orelectronic recorders) is sited a short distance from the decision point, and placed sothat it does not interfere with the decision-making process. The recording point, which
may be on either side of the track, is to be readily visible, if necessary by the additionof tapes, and numbered.
Where two or more viewing points are close to one another, it may be appropriate tohave a combined recording point with individual punches placed together or just asingle punch for all controls.
It is required to allow for several competitors, including wheelchairusers, to be at the decision point at the same time. All must havereasonably equal opportunity to view the flags and the terrain,
whether in a wheelchair or standing erect.
It is also required for the marker flags and decision point to be so
positioned that a movement by the observer 0.5m either side of thedecision point does not change the answer.
These requirements lead to a viewing window rather than a viewing
point of the dimensions given in the diagram.
To accommodate two wheelchair competitors at the decision point at the same time,
the conditions required for visibility of the flags and absence of parallax altering theflag sequence should also apply 2m back from the decision point stake.

Timed controls
For timed controls the competitor stays in a fixed
position.
The timed control map is a small segment of thecompetition map at the same scale, attached to a
stiff board not less than A5 in size. The segment
has the map circle in the centre of the map and isoriented so that the direction of view to the flags isstraight up the sheet. The example is from WTOC
2012.
For singly-presented maps the competitor has 30 seconds in which to give an answer.
When there are 1-2 tasks on a station a warning is given when 10 seconds remains of
the total available time for the station. When there are 3 or more tasks, a warning isgiven when 20 seconds remains of the total time for the station. The method ofanswering is either by pointing to a letter or stating the answer using the International
Code: Alpha, Bravo, Charlie, Delta, Echo, Foxtrot or Zero.
45

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------New rules for PreO came into force in January 2014 with the following changes:
 In PreO competition, each correctly identified control (excluding Timed
Controls) scores one point.
 In PreO competition the timed controls are used as tie-breakers to rankcompetitors with the same points score.
When analysed on completion of the course the correct answer at a timed control isawarded no point and the time recorded is the average of the two measurements, tothe nearest half or full second. An incorrect answer gains a 60 second penalty added
to the time taken to answer. Failure to answer is given a time of 90 seconds.
For multiply-presented maps the timing starts at the sighting of the first map and stops
when the answer is given for the final map.
A more detailed description of the timed control procedures is given in Appendix 2.
To provide fair competition the problem should be capable of solution by allcompetitors in the time allowed. The best outcome for a timed control test is that allcompetitors give the right answer but the more skilled do so more quickly. Problems
which are too difficult because of complexity or poor visibility result in guesswork andthis unfairly distorts the results. Also, problems which are too easy and solved in lessthan 5 seconds by the fastest competitors can be subject to uncertainties in the timing
procedure. The target time for the best competitors should be 5-10 seconds.
The zero answer option is not suitable for timed controls in PreO trail
orienteering competition.
(TG 26)

Also not suitable for timed controls are those requiring precision compass.
If the timed control flags are wide spread across the field of view, it may be useful toplace limit of view marker tapes in the terrain.

Marking of permitted and forbidden tracks
In TrailO competition there is often a need for competitors to enter or cross terrain thatis not marked as a path or track as part of the planned course. Such a permissive or
obligatory path is marked in the terrain by marker tape, either continuous or atintervals, and on the map by dashed purple line:

Also in TrailO competition there are often a number of paths and tracks that shall not
be used by the competitors. There are various reasons: they may not be suitable forwheelchair users; sometimes paths are forbidden to prevent the control site being46

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------viewed from a different direction; there may be a need to prevent unfair physicaladvantage from the young and fit running several hundred meters to get a better view
to solve the control problem.
As the diagram shows, there are two representations for forbidding paths being used.
The purple ‘do not pass this point’ bar on the map is the smaller symbol and may be
preferred if the map is congested. It is repeated on the ground with tape across thepath at the same point. This placement can be very precise, if needed, to define theextent from which the control site flags can be viewed.
The other representation is more general and indicates that the path along its length isforbidden.

Post-competition solution maps
Once the last competitor has finished and the course is closed, the solution sheets for
all the controls, including time controls, may be issued. These are:

either a set of map segments cut, enlarged to twice map scale (or more for very‘tight’ flag placements) and pasted onto a single, usually A4, sheet;or a map of the whole competition area, again normally twice scale. This map
is very large compared with the competition map and without additional
enlargement for tight controls.

In each case the maps show the decision points and positions of the flags at eachcontrol, which of the flags is correct or, for zero answers, the unflagged centre of thecircle. Also included are the descriptions for the time controls.
It is important that the solution sheet mapping agrees exactly with the competition
map. Late changes to the competition map that are not replicated in the solution
maps produce difficulties and invite dissension (see the next section).
A recommended procedure for mapping flag positions is to generate special
symbols on the competition map, which can be used in the terrain at greatly enlarged
scale for fine-tuning of the control and flag positions. On completion of the planning
process these symbols can be retained for making up the solution sheets. Before
printing the competition map the special symbols must be hidden!!
Of the two solution map options the segmented maps take more effort to produce andare at risk from late changes to the competition map but have more flexibility inpresenting the solutions. The general preference is for segmented solution maps.
A solution map example is given in Appendix 4.

47

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Disagreements, Complaints and Protests“Trail orienteering is a platform for dissent” (the late Peter Palmer)
Disagreement is a normal condition in trail orienteering. This is to be expected in a
discipline that uses subjective judgment and shades of meaning. To the credit of trail
orienteers it is normal for differences to be settled by the opinion of the Event Advisor.
Although complaints are submitted from time to time for consideration by the officials,
it is rare for any to be raised to the level of protest.
Sometimes the validity of a control needs to be re-examined after it has beenquestioned by competitors or officials. If it is faulty, there is the option of advising theOrganiser to void the control. Unlike in FootO this can be done without voiding thewhole course.
However, the voiding of a control should be undertaken with great care. If it is decided
to void a control, on the grounds that the control is unfair, this decision and the reason
for it must be announced to the competitors without delay, so that they or the teammanagers have the opportunity to make representations.
The procedures for complaints and protests are given in the Rules.

Off-trail is off-limits
It is important that the Organiser makes it clear that at no time on the day that an
event takes place (including the Model event) shall any competitor or official go offtrail to investigate control sites. By ‘off-trail’ is meant off permitted paths and marked
routes. Since all TrailO controls are planned to be viewed from permitted trails, andthe event controller/adviser has confirmed their acceptability, investigation of theterrain by moving off-track is not necessary, likely to confuse and unfair practice.
The Organiser is permitted by the rules to allow access to the competition area afteran event closes but this does not allow movement into the terrain off the permitted
trails.

8. PLANNING LOGISTICS
Stage 1
The first stage of planning is, for each terrain area proposed, to identify possible
routes of acceptable quality and length and to located within them a suitable numberof potentially usable control sites. Outline proposals for assembly, start, finish andtimed controls will also need to be considered at this time.
The first stage is best done when the visibility is good, not necessarily at the time ofyear of the competition. There is the possibility that seasonal vegetation can be cut, if
48

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------necessary, to give acceptable visibility round the control sites. However, it should be
confirmed, by visiting at the correct time of the year, that seasonal vegetation does notmake the area unusable.
Stage 2The second stage is to work on each proposed site in some detail, using flags, todevelop a problem of good standard. The map needs to be sufficiently prepared topermit outline planning. The positions of the key flags and the viewing point aremarked in the terrain.
This stage needs to be completed for the visit of the IOF Event Adviser(s) at 12
months before the event. The purpose of this visit, within the competition terrain, is
to approve the courses and the main details of the control sites (including reservesites). At this time map corrections which would be essential to the solution of the
problem are identified.
The information relating to the control sites is marked on a planning/controlling sheet.
An example of part of the IOF Event Adviser’s notes at WTOC 2004 is:Stage 3
The third stage is to revisit each control site for detailed final planning. For this,enlarged segments of the map are used to plot in the flag positions. The positions aremarked in the terrain.
This stage is to be complete for the IOF EA visit at 3 months before the event. The
objective during this visit is to confirm and approve: the overall structure of each course, the distance and time allowed;
 the standard and range of problems set;49

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------the exact positioning of flags at each control site and on the map segments forsolution sheets;the description of each control;
the map content (subject to further corrections identified);
timed control procedures;
And other essentials.

For this stage a more detailed control quality check sheet is useful:√

Day __ Control ___Map analysis around control
Part of competitionmap

1. All features on map identified in terrain
2. Features correctly positioned relative to each other
3. Features drawn with correct symbols
4. Map correction required?
Control analysis: position by
Mapped feature Confirm correct feature Confirm control flag position (including zero)

Part of solution
sheet map

Contouring Confirm height (altitude) of control feature Confirm reference point from which contour line
can be traced
Leading lines
 Possible lines on map numbered and checked interrain All lines support right answer
Compass bearing All bearings numbered, checked and values
recorded Bearing separation guideline obeyed
Distance estimation
 All relevant distances numbered, checked andvalues recorded
 Distance 25% guideline obeyed
Other flags
 All non-control flag positions sensible All flag positions marked for efficient relocation
Control description

Description

1. Conforms to rules and guidelines
2. Agrees with centre of circle
3. No better description possible

50

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------A complete example of the use of this control quality check sheet is given in Appendix
2.
Stage 4This are the final checks, immediately before the event. Checking should begin notlater than the number of days before the Model event equal to the number of days ofcompetition, including the Model. With the format of one model, plus two days ofchampionship preO competition and one day of championship tempO, four days
should be set aside for checking. This includes, for each event, the final draft of thecourse map, the final draft of the solution map, every control site with flags in position,and its decision point. The visibility of the flags and terrain from the decision point andany other essential viewing point needs to be confirmed as satisfactory for wheelchaircontestants and any necessary vegetation cutting be carried out. Also confirmed at
this time is the location and visibility of each punch, together with tapes within thecourse and the pre-start, post-finish and timed controls arrangements.
Once the above checks are confirmed as satisfactory, or any essential last minutecorrections made, the maps can be printed.
The reason for complete and careful checking of all aspects of each competition
several days in advance is that experience has shown that errors or omissions areoften found at this stage, despite very careful preparation. If found two days or so
before the competition, there is time to put them right. Last minute changes cangenerate mistakes (such as differences between the competition map and the map
segments on the solution sheets) and should be avoided.
For an international event the Planner will visit the terrain very many times, theController will visit many times. The IOF Event Advisor and/or the Assistant Advisor
will normally visit three times, a preliminary visit to confirm the suitability of theterrain(s) and deliver any technical training necessary, and visits at one year and at
three months before the event. At the one year visit the planning proposals should becomplete so that the courses can be approved and map corrections identified. At thethree months visit the final courses, the detailed flag positions and maps (including thesolution sheets) are confirmed.

Mechanical aids for flag placement
The method of marking the positions of flags by tag or tape is commonly used but canlead to unnecessary difficulties. With multi-day events, such as the world
championships, there are very many flags to be placed in position in a very short time.
It is essential that the flags are installed in exactly the positions agreed in the final
controlling session. This means locating each tag and searching for the hole madeearlier. More often than not, the hole is not found and the flag stake/rod has to be
driven in afresh. All this takes time.
A much improved method is to use plastic or metal tubing driven into the ground andleft in position. With metal rods for holding the flags, these are dropped into the tubes,

51

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------taking just a few seconds for each. The savings in time and the certainty that the flags
are in the correct positions are invaluable.
A particularly useful version of this method with a tube flanged at one end and closed
to a point at the other is used in Scandinavia.

9. DOCUMENTATIONThe 2008, reissued 2009, guideline documentation was prepared by Brian-Henry
Parker (GBR) for the IOF Trail Orienteering Commission with input from members of
the Trail Orienteering Commission, Rules Commission, Mapping Commission andother trail orienteers.
This extensive revision (January 2014) has been prepared by B-HP, assisted by theother members of the Guidelines Revision Working Group:
Ivo Tišljar (CRO)
Martin Jullum (NOR)
Martin Fredholm (SWE)
Hannu Niemi (FIN)
Jari Turto (FIN)
Krešo Keresteš (SLO)
Bohuslav Hulka (CZE)
Remo Madella (ITA)
to whom a thousand thanks are readily given.
In general the suggestions made by the Working Group have been incorporated into
the new text and diagrams. Where there was not consensus about a suggestedchange the final decision was taken with the assistance of Martin Fredholm. Martin
also carried out the proof reading of the document with impressive skill and deserves
double thanks.
For those wishing to translate the document into other languages, thedocument is available other formats. Also available are the OCAD files ofdiagrams with text.

Copyright: International Orienteering Federation 2014.
Much useful material is available from the IOF web site www.orienteering.org. The
TrailO documents page gives access to other technical documents.

52

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPENDIX 1
PLANNING EXAMPLES for ELITE TRAILO
There is a wide range of different problems that can be set by TrailO planners to give
elite TrailO competitors the necessary variety and technical level of challenge.
The examples given here are from World Championship events and can be added toin due course.
Zero examples are not given in a separate sub-section but are included, whereappropriate, in the use of the different techniques.
A TempO sub section is included.
Classic contouring

Example: PreO WTOC 2013, Finland, Day 2-4/5
A complex contour area with overlapping controls, inthis case the 5 flags giving two problems.
The zero control was testing.

Complex control clusters
Example: PreO 2: ETOC 2010 day 2:This shows full use of a detailed semi-open contour area with 18 flags providing 6
control problems, two pairs of overlapping A-E controls and two standalone A-D.
The flags were placed on mapped and unmapped features. Marker tapes separated
the clusters, as necessary.

53

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Another example of complex control cluster
PreO WTOC 2011, France
Three control problems from five flags. The three solution sheets are easy to interpret
but locating the centres of broken circles on the competition map required care.

54

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Between
The mid point may be easily determined between features with clear sides and, insuch cases, the degree of difficulty of the ‘between’ problem is increased by setting it
in a cluster of features, some mapped and some not.
Example: WTOC 2005, Japan,
Day 2-11.
Here there were a large number of small thickets.
All the flags were set at mid points between pairs ofthickets. The correct pair could be identified by thecentre of the circle on the map and by the control
description referring to the NW pair. Carefully
checking which thicket was which led to the correctflag.

The ‘between’ problem is much more difficult with contour line features, as in thefollowing example.

55

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Example: WTOC 2004, Sweden, Day 2-12.
The difficulty here is in identifying exactly
where the contour line was with respect to theground. In this case the contour coincided withthe open yellow. This indistinct vegetation
change helped to locate the contour line. The
dot knoll had a reasonably clear foot so it waspossible to determine that flag D was at or very
close to the mid point of the line from the knoll
to the nearest part of the ring contour.

Invisible features (including zero control example)
Features (such as pits) which cannot be seen from the viewing point or any otherpermitted position can be used in elite competition but with very great care. If nearby
visible features can be used to locate the flags with the necessary precision, theproblem may be acceptable.
A more straightforward option for using an invisible
feature is the zero answer in which all the flags areclearly identifiable on other features, as with thefollowing example:
Example: WTOC 2006, Finland,
Day 2-13,
The re-entrant could not be seen from the road but,
if its position was correctly judged, and not confusedwith the small, shallow re-entrant down slope, theexistence of the five flags in incorrect positions leads
to the zero answer.
Partly-invisible features
Features (such as ditches and paths) which cannot
be seen from the viewing point but are visible fromother points along the track can be used for
legitimate and testing problems.
Example: WTOC 2004, Swede,Day 2-10
None of the ditches were visible from the viewing
point. However, each ditch was visible when viewed
along its length. By sighting along the three ditches
in turn, it was seen that all flags were marking ditches
and the correct flag, just east of the E ditch junction
could be identified.

56

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Unmapped features (including zero control example)
The use of unmapped features can provide useful problems. These features arelegitimately unmapped because they fall below the mapping threshold that thesurveyor has set, but there is potential for confusion with similar features that areprominent enough to be mapped. Perhaps the most common, but usable feature, isthe small boulder, but there are other possibilities.

Example: WTOC 2004, Sweden
Day 2-13
This was a particularly testing control. Three flags
were on unmapped knolls, one on a mappedboulder and another on an unmapped boulder.
Visibility was restricted, even after some clearance
work but a good line of sight from the viewing pointwith estimated bearing and distance showed agood knoll with no flag.

Sighting lines
A single sighting line can be used to fix a point on a linear feature and two such lines
intersect to fix a point in an area feature. In both cases the intersecting angle should
be sufficiently large to give accurate setting (90 degrees being the optimum).
Shallower intersecting will need greater angular separation of the flags.
Example: WTOC 2012, Scotland
Day 1-7 Spur, W part.
Once the two small holly trees had been seen as
providing a sighting line to the centre of the circle (blueflag) the practical skill required was to locate the sighting
line in the terrain, with one leading mark behind and one
in front..

Displaced similar features (including zero control examples)
The existence of two or more displaced or parallel similar features can be used to set
testing problems. The intention is to invite misidentification of which feature is which.
These normally are set to give a zero result, the correct feature being unmarked withthe parallel feature(s) being flagged.

57

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Example: WTOC 2004, Sweden, Day1-5,
The southern pair of flags was on an
unmapped (undersize) boulder. The
northern boulder was not visible from theviewing point, being hidden by the thicket,
but could be seen from further along the
track. Careful map reading of the thicket
and small path confirmed the boulder to beat the centre of the circle and unflagged(marked o )A much more difficult version of the parallel feature(s) problem is met when thegeneral features along the track are broad and repetitive and do not permit easy
location. In such circumstances it is easy to be misled by the false control, with flags
set so as to appear as a problem requiring very careful analysis, as in the following
example:Example: WTOC 2006, Finland
Day 1-6
The approach from the west had a number ofrepetitions of the re-entrant and spur
combinations, all with pockets of denser
vegetation on the north side of the track. The
false depression was surrounded by higher
ground which, at first sight, matched thatmapped round the correct depression. This
control needed careful back-checking along the
track to confirm its true position.

Irregular rock face
The mid point foot of a rock face is the
middle of the actual mapped length,
including changes of direction.
Example: WTOC 2004, Sweden
Day 1-1
Since Column G has no description, thecontrol is at the mid-point foot. The midpoint of the mapped feature is at thenearest SE corner. The centre of the circle

58

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------precisely indicates this SE corner and eliminates the distractor flag E at the mid-pointof the SE face.
This was set as an easy first control on the first day of the first world championships.
But the last control on the same day, D1-18,
also a rock face, was much more difficult.
The mapped rock face was short and curved
as indicated so that the western part was not
visible from the viewing point, but visible on
approach from the south. The rock faceextended further east than as shown because
this section was below the mapping threshold.
Both of these character-istics gave competitors
difficulty.

Contour following
Many elite problems have control positions set with respect to contour lines. These
problems require the competitor to trace out a contour and relate it to the flags
Example: WTOC 2006, Finland
Day 1-1
Compass bearings from the path crossing
eliminated flag A. To determine which of the tworemaining flags, or neither, agreed with thecentre of the circle, the contour had to be traced
out. The point at which it crossed the northern
path could be determined by judging or pacing
the distance ‘d’. The contour, so traced, showedflag C to be in the correct position

Long range control (including zero control example)
These are acceptable for occasional use, provided the visibility and contrast is good(and there is no fog on the day). The following is an unusual example:

59

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example: WTOC 2006, Finland, Day 2 –7
This viewing distance, at 200m, was well beyond normal limits, but the viewing point
was elevated, giving an overview of the distant terrain. There was good contrast sothat the flags could be picked out against the rough open ground and the trees. The
problem was relatively easily solved by the presumption that the small depression
could not be identified at that range and, even if flagged, its position could not be
confirmed with precision. Therefore the answer must be zero. This was verified bysighting the power line and noting that only one flag was beyond it, this flag being thewrong side of the hill.
Although this problem was only of moderate technical difficulty, it demonstrates that,with care, long range problems can be set up successfully.

Parallax
Parallax is the ‘apparent change in position of objects caused by change in position of
the observer’.

60

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------This property is used in elite trail orienteering when the sighting point from which thecorrect flag is decided is distant from the staked viewing point and the relative
sequence of the flags is different at the two points. It demands skills of identifying thesame flag in the terrain when viewed from the different points, particularly when thecorrect flag cannot be viewed continuously when moving from the sighting point to theviewing point.
Example: WTOC 2006 Finland
Day 1-13.
From the viewing point the precise
positions of the two flags north of theknoll could not be seen. However,when viewed along the path (as shownby the arrow), it was possible to seethat one flag was at the northern footof the small hill. From this sighting
point this was flag B. The same flagfrom the viewing point was flag C.
The principle of parallax can be also
used to separate nearer and further
features which are some distance away and tend to merge together. Viewing thefeatures while moving along the track identifies those which are in front of the others.

Example: WTOC 2004, Sweden, Day 2-1.
This, at 125 m, was another long range control with good visibility and contrast. Froma stationary position the copses merged and appeared to be at the same distance.
Moving along the track showed which were in front and which behind. Reference tothe building identified the various copses.
Extrapolation
This is the extension of a linear feature, sometimes the other side of the track fromcontrol area, to fix the position of the required flag.

61

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Example: WTOC 2007, Ukraine, Day 1-1.
The contour ring representing the hill had its NE end
just intersecting the rough open. The remainder ofthe contour could then be traced at that height. This
could be checked against the long diameter of thering. The flag at the centre of the circle was justinside this contour, as required.
As a further check, the extrapolation of the line of thepath on the other side of the track passes through thecentre of the circle.

Precision distance estimation
Lateral distance across the terrain can be
estimated accurately, provided there are mappedfeatures at the same range that can act as abase line.

Example: WTOC 2005, JapanDay 2-5This is a moderately easy example. The baseline features across the field of view at the rangeof the flags are the northern end of the small
thicket and the path/ vegetation boundary
crossing. The control position was at the mid
point between the two. A more testing problem would be use a ratio other than 50:50,
perhaps 33:67.
‘Linear‘ features
Area features defined by lines with very shallow
curvature, as in the following example, may beconsidered as linear features.
Example: WTOC 2008, Czech Republic
Day 1-3
Although the feature is a shallow re-entrant, the formline has little curvature and cannot be used to fix thecentre of the circle. This was done by reference to the
nearby tree and supported by a number of sighting
lines passing through the circle.

62

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------High accuracy precision control
Example: WTOC 2013, Finland, Day 2-18.
This is a high accuracy problem with flags close
together, requiring the ability to locate the centre of thecircle with precision on the map and then in the terrain.
The key to the solution was with the two trees. Sighting
the three flags from the viewing point ruled out flag A as
being too close to the W tree. By viewing from by the S
path junction so that the line between the trees was atright angles to the direction of sighting, it could be seenthat flag C was midway between the trees. From thisviewing point flag B appeared to be correct. It was thennecessary to confirm that flag B was offset from the line
between the trees by the distance estimated from themap, which it was.
An alternative method of determining the position offlag B between the trees for competitors prepared to do
the arithmetic was to measure the map distances along
the track. Since the trees were close to the path,pacing along the path could have the required
precision.

‘A’’ control in the presence of other flags (including zero control example)

63

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Examples: WTOC 2012, Scotland Day 2
The terrain carried mid-age pine trees restricting visibility:
For Control 5 only the four NE’most flags were visible from the viewing point.
For Control 6 all nine flags were visible so tapes were laid.
For Control 9 only the five flags shown on the map were visible.

SOME TEMPO EXAMPLES
Example: TempO WTOC 2012, Scotland, 1-3
This is a map very easy to read, with negligible
contouring and a considerable number ofindividually mapped single trees, some fully matureand the remainder much smaller. All three control
problems referred to trees. The problem ofidentifying which tree was which was assisted by
the large trees having a different symbol.
This trio of control problems would be easy for PreO
but is well suited to TempO.

Example: WTOC 2013, Finland,.
TempO final, 34-36
This is a more featured map with four
readily identifiable blocks of forest, threeof which were associated with thecontrols. In each case the right block offorest had to be identified and the choicemade between two flags or zero.
The terrain sloping down made the reentrant less obvious but the reducedheight of the flag confirmed its position.
A good TempO combination of different
features.

64

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Example: TempO WTOC 2013, Finland,
TempO final 31-33
A difficult set of controls at very short range (note thegreatly enlarged solutions map). The map of rocky
knolls and bare rock is much more difficult to interpret
quickly that the example from Scotland.
A testing set appropriate to a World TempO final.

65

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPENDIX 2
TIMED CONTROL PROCEDURES
1. Purpose of timed controls
In the PreO form of trail orienteering the time controls are used to separate
competitors with the same point scores for correct answers. The number of timed
controls, additional to the main course, is usually 2-4 in number. The competitor withthe fastest overall corrected* time at the timed controls for any particular final score is
ranked above slower competitors with the same score.
*Incorrect answers or failure to answer at timed controls incur time penalties, which
are added to the actual time taken to give the corrected time.
In the TempO form of competition all the controls are timed. In such competition there
are several stations and many controls. The competitors are ranked for thecompetition by their corrected overall times for all the controls.
2. Timed control maps
A timed control map differs from the main competition map, from which it is often
extracted as a segment at the same scale. This segment is rotated so that the middle
top of the map is in the centre direction of view of the control flags. Magnetic northdirection is added.
The map, at its centre, shows a single control circle, together with a description. The
map does not mark the viewing point.
To ensure fairness at time controls, where as little as a second can separate
competitors, it is important that the maps are standardized in form and appearance.
The Rules specify the basic requirements and are repeated here with additionalcomment:








The time control map is placed on a rectangular piece of stiff material.
The map segment is either circular or square with diameter or side between 5
cm and 12 cm. If a square map segment is used the sides are parallel to thematerial the map segment is put on.
The control circle for each control is marked at the exact centre of the map
segment.
The viewing point of the seated competitor is within the map segment but notmarked on the map.
The map segment is oriented so that its vertical is at the mid-viewing angle
between the A-flag and the furthermost flag on the right. This angle is thesame for all controls at the same time control station. See the illustrations
below.
The time control map and procedure should be modelled before the competition
to allow the competitors to confirm the arrangements.

66

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Preparing timed control maps:
These are from WTOC 2012 but re-drawn tocomply with 2014 rules and practice.
1. On a conveniently enlarged map of thetimed control area, mark the position of thecontrol flags visible from the timed control
station. In this case there were five flags
visible from the viewing point near thewater’s edge at the end of the path.
2. Determine the bearing of the line
bisecting the angle of view between the Aflag and the furthermost flag on the right. In
this case the bearing is 245o.
3. Rotate the timed control area map (at competition scale) by this bearing. The midview of all flags should now be vertical, bottom to top.
4. For each control, position a square or circular template of between 5 and 12 cm
side or diameter so that, in each case, the control circle is at the centre of thesegment.
5. Extract the segments, add the descriptions and a north arrow, then print.
6. In the two timed control maps for this station (Paralympic, Day 2) it can be seen thatthe background map has moved but maintained the same direction for magnetic north:67

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------It might be asked why this single rotation of the map, followed by vertical andhorizontal movement to bring the control circle to the centre of the segment, ispreferred to rotating the map separately for each control so that the control andviewing point are in line up the vertical middle of the segment, followed by vertical shift
to place the control circle at the centre. The answer is that, with the map set at a fixed
angle throughout, there is consistency on the map segments with any Column G
directions given in the descriptions.
It is instructive to note that the same site
had two stations in close proximity. The
second for the Open class, giving a total ofseven flags overall, but only five visible
from each station. The enlarged map
shows the very different mid-viewing
angle, around 297o.
The northernmost two flags were notvisible from the Paralympic class station
because of the lie of the land andintervening poolside vegetation. Similarly,
the southernmost two flags of the seven
were not visible from the Open class station, the knoll obscured by vegetation and theform line spur flag was set behind a tree.
These examples from PreO competition had only five flags in view, with two timed
controls per station and NO zero answers.
TempO stations usually have six flags in view, with at least three controls per station.
Zero answers ARE permitted.
3. Basic requirements of timed controls procedure
3.1 At a single timed control the competitor is given a map with a cover sheet andintroduced to the terrain. Immediately following this the timing starts. The map has acontrol circle and description.
The competitor reads the map, surveys the terrain and gives an answer. The timing
stops.
Two watches are used. Both times and the answer are entered on a record sheet andrepeated on the competitor’s control card.
3.2 At multiple timed controls the maps are handed out as a set and the timing isfrom the start until the last answer.
This procedure is used in both PreO and TempO. The earlier form of presenting themaps one at a time and timing them separately has now been superseded.

68

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4. Typical detailed procedure at a timed control station
It is usual to view the terrain and flags from a shelter.
In the shelter, over the viewing point, there is a chair. For wheelchair users the seat isplaced to one side and the wheelchair manoeuvred into position over the VP marker.
The normal staffing is for three officials, the recorder plus two timing officials. It is
possible, but more difficult, to manage with two officials by overlapping duties. Two isa minimum, four is fully staffed.

A timed control at WTOC 2008. Seated competitors have the same view as those in wheelchairs.

The competitors are held at a stop point some distance away,from which they cannot see the control terrain and flags. They
are brought forward in turn. The fourth official can be usefully
employed for this but an alternative is to place a suitable noticeat the stop point and the recorder or one of the other officials
calls the competitors forward.
As the competitor comes into the shelter the control card ishanded over. The competitor’s details (name and number) areentered into the record.
At least one timing official stands in front of the chair to block the view of the terrain
and flags while the competitor settles.
Once settled, the competitor is handed a single or set of maps with a cover sheet.
Then the competitor is introduced to the terrain with a standard routine. The officials
step aside and one of them points out the outermost flags: Alpha and Echo, if fiveflags are in use, or Foxtrot, if six flags are in use (as permitted in TempO).

69

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Competitors are not allowed to slow this process by saying they cannot see one of theflags. Sometimes flags can be difficult to see quickly and easily (shadow, flags at very
different heights or distances, etc). In these cases the official shall add additional
information to precisely indicate flag positions to competitors, such as “far away”,“beside …”, “behind …”. The official’s statement shall be the same for all competitors.
Equally the competitors are not allowed to speed this process by saying they see all
the flags without them being pointed out. The pointing procedure is a ritual to give thesame viewing time for each competitor.
Immediately following the pointing out of the last flag the official invites the competitor
to view the map(s) with the words the time starts now.
For one map (3.1 above):
The competitor gives an answer. The timing stops andthe map is taken from the competitor.
An answer is given either by speaking, using theInternational Phonetic Alphabet “Alpha to Echo, (orFoxtrot)” or by pointing out the letter on a pointing strip, or
both. The pointing letters may be on a separate card, on
a trestle in front of the competitor or, as in the photograph,on the map board.
Times are measured using two timing devices.
The answer is repeated by the recorder and entered into the records, together with thetwo times, each rounded down to completed seconds.
[The reason the recorder repeats the answer is to confirm the selection and avoid
problems of pronunciation.]
The competitor is given a maximum of 30 seconds to give an answer. A ten-secondsto go warning is given at 20 Seconds.
For several maps together (3.2 above):
The competitor is given a set of maps in order. It is essential that the maps haveprominent sequence numbering that can be checked by the officials before being
handed to the competitor AND by the competitor before timing starts. A
recommended method of sequence marking is given in Appendix 4.
The competitor considers the problem on the first map and gives an answer. Thisanswer is repeated by the recorder and entered into the records.
Without delay the competitor considers the problem on the second map and gives ananswer, which is repeated and recorded.

70

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------In like manner, the competitor continues to the last map and with the final answer, thetiming stops.
In multiple map timing the maximum total time allowed is 30 seconds multiplied by the
number of timed controls. If there are two timed controls, a ten seconds-to-go warning
is given at 50 seconds. If there are three or more timed controls, a twenty seconds-togo warning is given when 20 seconds remain of the maximum allowable time.
Competitors must follow the map order and deal with each map without reference toearlier or later maps.
Finally … Whatever system is in use, the answers and times are copied onto thecompetitor’s control card and the competitor departs the control station.
5. Screening
There can be problems with visibility of the timed control terrain for competitors
approaching the viewing position after being called up. In these cases some form ofscreening may be required to interrupt the view.
In recent years there has been a trend by Event Advisors to require complete (100%)
screening of the timed control terrain on the approach. To accomplish this in theforest some federations erect temporary 2m fencing covered with opaque polythene
sheet. Other federations cannot do this without objection from environmentalorganisations (refer to IOF Environmental Charter). A recommended alternative is touse a string of national flags, weighted along the bottom edge. Experience has shownsuch an arrangement to be fully effective and acceptable to those with environmental
sensitivities.

The approach‘Your time starts now’

from WTOC 2012

4. Future development.
The system described here is that of manual timing and manual recording of answers
and times. Currently (2014) electronic timing is being developed for trail orienteering.
If and when approved for event use, new and revised procedures at timed controls will
be issued.

71

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPENDIX 3 EXAMPLE OF SOLUTIONS SHEET From WTOC 2012 Day2

72

IOF Technical Guidelines for Elite Trail Orienteering
2014-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

APPENDIX 4. A recommended method of sequence marking on time
control maps
The picture to the right shows one
page of a multipage document that canbe downloaded from the IOF TrailO
web pages. It contains templates withsequence markings that are usefulwhen producing time control maps for
PreO and TempO competitions. The
document contains templates for ten
stations and five controls at eachstation for both TempO and PreO (thelatter with the zero square blacked out).
The templates are cut out and placed together with their respective maps as shown in
the three pictures below. The outlines represent A5 clear plastic laminate that areused to fix the map and the template together.

Below are two sets of maps containing the maps prepared above plus a cover sheet.
The three maps in each set are slightly offset from each other in the pictures just toshow that they are all present.
In the left hand picture below, all maps are in the correct order 1-2-3, confirmed by theclear black sequence numbering. In the right hand picture, the maps are in the wrong
order 1-3-2, easily seen by the crossed over square between 1:1 and 1.3.
This marking method makes it easy for both officials and competitors to reassure
themselves that the maps are in the correct order before the timing starts.

73