OMM map survey

[ba-ba]

OMM are rectifying their maps after the poor quality last year.
They're running a survey to see what Mountain Marathoners think/want, so have a look at their options and have your say.
https://www.theomm.com/news/omm-comm...or-your-map-20
There's no right answer, but I'd say OS is the wrong answer

[Stagger]

Mrs Stagger (who has done a couple of OMM's) preferred the Lovell Johns Map – 1:40,000 with 15 metre contour lines.

[Splatcher]

I don't care as long as it's readable. It wasn't the original map that was the problem at last year's OMM, it was that it was both photoreduced from the size it had been designed for, and it was poorly printed too. There was a lot on it I just couldn't make out (speaking as an old man).

[ba-ba]

sometimes a lot on it is too much IMO.
Having run on Dave Peel's mountain maps, they are very good (some people dislike his orienteering maps) although may confuse some more than Stirling's, which have been used in the past.

[karen nash]

Do the survey. it does also allow you to write a comment, I said pretty much what you and Andy have said

[gej]

I would prefer Harvey/Stirling, but if OS is more cost effective I would opt for the 50k, as used successfully in the Lamm, rather than the 25k. The organisers appear not to have considered that one.

[Mark G]

I would prefer Harvey/Stirling, but if OS is more cost effective I would opt for the 50k, as used successfully in the Lamm, rather than the 25k. The organisers appear not to have considered that one.

Rock and Run once provided each team with a 1:25000 for detailed nav and a 1:50000 for overall route planning which was the best of both worlds - except we had to mark up both the night before with all the controls for all courses for both days! It was the Ben Nevis and Mamores area, starting from Kinlochleven. I still have the 1:25.
My personal preference is still Harveys.

[BillJ]

Rock and Run once provided each team with a 1:25000 for detailed nav and a 1:50000 for overall route planning which was the best of both worlds - except we had to mark up both the night before with all the controls for all courses for both days!

I'd find that confusing, referrring to 2 maps!
On the OMM, after seeing the base map the night before so knowing what the quality was, I carried an old map from a previous MM of the area, as well as the supplied map. But soon found that I couldn't refer to both and had to stuff the old one away.

[Toreador]

Rock and Run once provided each team with a 1:25000 for detailed nav and a 1:50000 for overall route planning which was the best of both worlds - except we had to mark up both the night before with all the controls for all courses for both days! It was the Ben Nevis and Mamores area, starting from Kinlochleven. I still have the 1:25.
My personal preference is still Harveys.

The LAMM did likewise in 2005 (Mull). It was very useful as there was an area that involved some fine micro-navigation, for which the 1:25K was ideal, with the 1:50K fine for the rest.
They did the same in 2006, but it didn't really help as it was a traditional MM area (with mostly macro nav) and they haven;t repeated the experiment since.

They now use 1:50K blown up to 1:40K, which works fine for the Highlands, but I'm not sure it would be appropriate elsewhere.