Spec-Savers Kids Right to Good Sight programme

I've been with a Spec-Savers in Jo'burg for many years so I was very pleased to see a Spec-Savers branch here in Parys.

Last week Thursday I popped into the branch to enquire about vision tests for children and making a booking. The friendly staff said that consultations for children under 12 were free of charge. A pleasant surprise. I made appointments for Kyla and Ruben for Friday. We knew that Kyla may have a vision deficit as she was tested a few years ago. This was to be Ruben's first optometrist visit.

Kyla does indeed need glasses and so after the test, we headed to the section to choose frames. They have an excellent range of children's frames and after narrowing it down to three, she chose her favourite. It was then that they told us that children's glasses are also free of charge up to the age of 12. Kyla is 10. How incredible!

I looked Spec-Savers up online and discovered their Kids Right to Good Sight programme, which provides free test and spectacles for children aged 6 to 12.

Ruben's consultation was smooth - and he learned about the inside of the eye too. His vision is perfect, so no glasses for him.

Spec-Savers, thank you. You've got customers for life.

From the Spec-Savers website:

In 2008 we launched our kids Right to Good Sight campaign that has assisted over 193 243 South African children with FREE eye tests, Colour coded frames and Aquity prescription lenses, dramatically improving their lives forever.

Our pledge is to make a lasting difference in the lives of all children, so if you are in a school environment, and know of any kids 6 to 12 years of age who are in desperate need of spectacles, get them to contact their nearest Spec-Savers store to book a free vision screening test.

Brown squiggly lines bring bliss

I know how to use OCAD - orienteering map-making software. I'm not the most proficient nor practised as I don't map very often - and I haven't mapped any seriously tricky terrain. I've modified other people's maps and I've drawn my own maps of schools and a park. I'm busy with my first river map (mapping the bank features and islands) and a map of a primary school here in Parys.

My next project is to create a basic orienteering map for Forest Run. It serves a couple of functions:

• A hand-out to introduce participants to the delights of a map and knowing where you are. Yes, the route will be fully marked, but I like to think that runners may enjoy knowing where they are. Of course they can tuck it into their backpacks and leave it there...
• A guide for my marshals (many of whom are orienteers) to get to their marshalling points - and for sweeping the route.
• For safety: this special version for my marshals and medics will show escape routes and accesses.
• The start of a wonderful map for technical, long-distance orienteering events and for rogaining, a long-distance, time-limited form of orienteering - my favourite-favourite.

For now, this will be a really simple map - I'm short on time and a complex map is not required just yet.

In order to create an orienteering map, one needs a base map. We generally use orthophotos, which have been corrected for distortion and they carry contour lines, which indicate elevation and topographical features. Google Earth screen shots do work - for small areas - but there are no contours. 

Fortunately, being in the modern age, we can get digital aerial imagery and also digital contour lines; both of which can be georeferenced and imported into OCAD.

I've never had experience with this.

Until today.

OMG! My heart runneth over with bliss. And I can give full credit to Stephanie, who supplied me with the necessary files - all beautifully georeferenced and ready to go. Sarah R and Paul were also on hand, offering assistance - thank you. Nic, with his OCAD experience, got me to the final stage of success tonight - getting my GPS track in.

And so it was that I successfully imported the contour line file. With counsel, I got the background images in (13 x image files at 285MB each!). And I've just experienced the joy that comes with importing a gpx file and successfully positioning it so that my track for the routes is in the correct place. Oh, what joy!

Now the work starts - to turn these squiggly lines into something that can be read and interpreted. 

Altitude profiles are relative

In drawing the altitude profiles for the Forest Run routes last night, I had to decide on the best way to present the route. What kind of elevation scale was I going to use?

The challenge is to indicate that there are climbs and descents - some of which are steep; but not horrendously so. Out here in the Vredefort Dome, there isn't anything too nasty, other than the sting-in-the-tail descent near the end. No climb nor descent goes on and on; but they're still there to test you.

I plugged my gpx track into Google Earth and also used two online apps to compare profiles and also for them to calculate cumulative climb. Although the results vary, I think approximately 1330m of cumulative gain is fair for the 46km route at Forest Run.

Here is my profile for the 46km route:

So, how does Forest Run compare?

Well, Dorothy, we're not in the Drakensberg Mountains, the Witteberg Mountains nor on Table Mountain. But we've still got some climb.

	Distance (km)	Cumulative climb (metres)	average climb (m/km)
Forest Run	46	1330	29
Rhodes Run	52	1380	27
Skyrun Lite	65	2400	37
Drakensberg Northern Trail	40	1640	41
Ultra Trail Cape Town	35	1800	51
The Otter	42	2400	57

I couldn't make a profile for Ultra Trail Cape Town as they don't show a y-axis elevation scale on their altitude profiles. I did grab profiles from these other events - and I've scaled them appropriately to compare. That's Forest Run with the grey shading.

The thing with cumulative climb values for events is that ascents are... cumulative.

Looking at my average climb (metres per kilometre) calculation, The Otter beats all the others for its up-down-up-down of its route, even though it doesn't have the massive and steep ascent of Skyrun Lite nor the big climbs of Drakensberg Northern Trail. Rhodes Run, like Skyrun Lite, also has a big climb, some stuff in the middle and then a long and steep descent.

Of these runs, I've done Skyrun, Rhodes Ultra and Forest Run. For sure, Skyrun is the toughest on the legs and lungs on the ascents; and that's a long long long steep steep steep drop into Balloch. It also has some wicked thigh-burning climbs in the middle.

Could this Forest Run route be harder than Rhodes? Mmm... It has been a long time since I did Rhodes and I had a superb day out there so even considering Rhodes' Mavis Bank and the drop into the hamlet of Rhodes... Definitely not an apples-with-apples comparison.

Climb really is so different on the legs if you have one big climb or lots of smaller ups and downs.

Also, it isn't only the elevation that makes a route challenging, it is also the underfoot terrain.

And how hard you're pushing.

And the actual elevation (height above sea level) of the route. There's a big difference in scaling a steep ascent at 2500m than at sea level.

Here are the altitude profiles for these same events, as presented on their websites. Take note of the elevation scale on the y-axis.

Drakensberg Northern Trail - recent host to the SA Trail Champs. 40km. Each elevation mark is at 250m intervals.

Rhodes Run. 52km. Elevation is in 100m intervals. This looks like you climb Mavis Bank on all fours... Oh, wait, some people do!

Skyrun Lite 65km (route ends at Balloch, in the dip before the spike at the end). Elevation is in 500m intervals. Looks a lot more tame here than on my profile scale.

The OTTER. 42km. Elevation is in 10m intervals. Very spikey, which ever way you look at it.

Of course, I could have presented a more flattened profile for Forest Run - I think this actually looks more like reality if you're looking at the hills.

Next time you look at an altitude profile, don't stress if you see big bumps. Take a look first at the altitude interval on the y-axis and compare to something you've done before to put it into perspective.

Altitude profiles really are an indication - not a definitive guide to the difficulty of an event.

Regardless of the climb, you've got to do the distance. So just jump in, enter and enjoy the experience of the route, terrain and scenery.

Happy 15th Birthday www.AR.co.za

I was snoozing a bit yesterday so this is a one-day late HAPPY BIRTHDAY to www.AR.co.za. 

www.AR.co.za turned 15 YEARS OLD yesterday!

I started the site back on 11 April 2001 to provide a central avenue for everything AR in South Africa. I started building the site in mid-2000, but only put it live on 11 April 2001.

Back then the site was built in straight HTML with dozens of pages that I hand-coded in notepad! Later, I put the site into CSS style sheets and then later onto the WordPress platform that it currently runs on.

Although the event calendar has been a focus, there’s an abundance of articles (over 100), most of which I’ve written over the years, covering everything from basics, to seconding, medical issues, navigation and teammates. There have also been hundreds of event reports, written by you, from an array of events.

The national ‘advracesa‘ email group list… I set up the email list on 27 June 2001. Oddly, I thought the email group was older… but that’s probably because I was administering a number of others at the tme. There are currently 903 members – some have been on this group for more than a decade!

Looking at the current member list (I cannot account for early adopters who have left over the years), Mark Le Roux was the first to join on 28 June 2001; Darron Raw was second on 29 June 2001. Some other names you’ll recognise may include Francois Oosthuizen and Tim Skeep (2 July 2001), Piers Pirow and Erica Terblanche (20 August 2001) and Nicholas Mulder (14 September 2001). Expedition Africa director Stephan Muller joined the list on 21 May 2002.

tick-tock… the years have been full of adventures and adventure races.

Three cheers for another 15 years!

Lisa (AR’s mom)