Suitable for valuable competitions? I’m not sure…

First, I’m not sure whether this method is fair enough. The quality and consistency of the map is even more important than in the cases where all competitors run the same controls: If a part of a “spreading area” is questionably mapped, some competitors may be affected, and some not. Tenuous, at least…

Second, this changes the focus of O towards to “planning in intervals” (vs. common “planning continuously”). In the example, you have to plan 8 of 10 controls and routes while running from start to 2. When leaving control 2, the plan for the next 6 controls is fix (and implies the route plan). A later correction of your plan will be disastrous.
This is different from common continuous planning: you make a (route only) plan for the next x controls, but you have the chance to adapt the plan from control to control (when you understand map maker’s peculiarity once, or when you learn what your body is able to do in this terrain at this day, …)
The new spreading idea might oblige to some runners, and be inconvenient for others, so it moves (distorts?) something in O.

=> urban terrain and sprint are possible implementations — if at all. Unthinkable to do this in the WOC 2011 terrain :-)

Robert