Marathon Conspiracy Theory

What modifications to the course happened after the measurement?

My schedule:

Arrived on Wed. December 16

Wed. afternoon - numbered all of the light poles in the median (between inside and outside lanes) starting with pole #1 in the middle of the first turn. This was essential to help identify the location of all the split points because there were no other identifiable landmarks.

Thursday morning - measured 400 m calibration course (2x ) with 50 m class I steel tape . The tape is calibrated and certified every meter by the Japanese institute of standards. I purchased two of these tapes at a cost of $800 each.

Thursday late morning - spent several hours working with athletes, agents, officials, coaches, constructing the optimum turns

Thursday afternoon - measured the course twice - difference between my two measurements - less then one foot.

Thursday - early evening - the course was independently checked by another World Athletics level A measurer. The difference between our measurements for the loop was approximately 0.40 m. We then measured and verified key split locations.

Thursday night - met with organizers to verify the start and finish locations

Friday - spent most of the day measuring all of the other split points.

Saturday - painted a blue line showing the few tangents on the course.

Sunday morning - 3 am. I personally hand placed every mile marker, km marker, half way marker + 800 m to go, and 400m to go.

Race time - followed the lead packs (various laps) to watch the path that the athletes ran. FYI -They ran the course that was measured.

fyi - I also served as the Referee of the event.

Also you last part about the blue line for the Olympics is not necessarily correct depending on when it is painted.

fyi - As the Chairperson of the Road Running Technical Council we are always looking for new measurers. Let me know if you are interested and I can have an experienced measurer contact you or I can teach you myself.

OP If David Katz was NOT there then I think you might have been onto something. As soon as I saw the photos of them out reworking the turns I knew that the course would be spot on

D.Katz: Thanks for the insight into the measuring process. It's very interesting to get a behind the scenes look at how this all works. I'm extremely familiar with this venue. It's clear the roundabouts were optimized for speed (cone-marked, etc.) before the official course measurements were taken. Pay no attention to the conspiracy theorists.

If I understand correctly nothing was changed following the initial certification of the course. You merely double checked the distance. And then an independent measurer verified the already certified course.

Thank you.

Actually to be technically correct, the course was measured by two World Athletics Grade A measurers, then the paperwork was submitted to World Athletics. This method produces a World Athletics certified course that is verified in advance of the race and would not need any additional measurements if records are set. This has become the standard protocol for many high profile races. When I measured the London, Rio, and Tokyo Olympic marathon courses, there were always at least another Level A measurer measuring the course with me (Tokyo we had a total of four World Athletics measurers.) The Olympic Trails Marathon in Atlanta had three World Athletics "A" measurers + we had several others on race day assisting with the course set up and management.

+1

Dave:

Thanks for all the insight you provide , it's always interesting.

I have a general question about the short course prevention factor. The AIMS manual states, "To prevent a course from being found to be short on future re-measurement, it is

recommended that a “short course prevention factor“ be built in when laying out the course. For bicycle measurements this factor should be 0.1% " (emphasis mine) This is from the 2004 edition, I don't know if there is a more recent version. If the SCPF is only recommended is this one of the things that gets discussed prior to measuring the course? Having a SCPF of 10 meters rather than 42 meters would be attractive in claiming a course is the fastest. But it could also lead to pressure to go smaller and smaller especially when records are on the line.

I am curious, is the 0.1% standard or can it be negotiated?

I'm about to open Pandora's Box!

Every measurer I know incorporates the full SCPF into their measurement.

But the question is what is the measurer trying to achieve? And the simple answer is a course that measures out to be at least the advertised distance. So the SCPF is added to protect a runners performance not to be found short upon re-measurement for record ratification.

Both USATF and World Athletics allows a course to be verified in advance by having the course measured by at least two World Athletics measurers (A & A or A & B). If the course is measured first by only a B measurer, then it must be checked by an A measurer.

Here's were it gets tricky- Measurer X measures and has certified a marathon course (42195m + the scpf 42m) but he was a sloppy measuring the tangents. Then an athlete breaks a record on that course. A re-measurement reveals that the course was only 42196 (without the scpf) - does the record count???

The answer is yes!

Let that sink in and I await your next question(s)

Seems worth it to incorporate the full SCPF for all distances up to a marathon - I don't think that is controversial. For an elite marathoner that is still only 7-8 seconds. For a distance like 5K it's less than a second.

Thank you for explaining what goes into measuring a course. There are too many idiots here who think course certification can be done by any untrained bumbler out there hoping to make a quick buck on a race.

Actually it doesn't really take too much to be a good course measurer and I probably could teach you all the basics in just a few hours.

I good measurer has the following qualities:

1. Good bike rider. You don't have to be fast, just steady and consistent

2. Able to ride the tangents of the defined course. This may not be as easy as it sounds. It often requires a considerable amount of fearlessness because often you need to ride against traffic.

3. Basic math skills

4. Meticulous

5. The ability to constantly look for errors.

6. uncompromising integrity

7. Good note taker & Prepare documentation of the measurement for review.

8. Know the rules and protocols that govern our part of the sport

9. Creative and the understanding that you often need to work with several stake holders to create the optimum course.

10. Dedication

11. Love of the sport and the understanding that we are here to serve the athletes.

D.Katz wrote:

Here's were it gets tricky- Measurer X measures and has certified a marathon course (42195m + the scpf 42m) but he was a sloppy measuring the tangents. Then an athlete breaks a record on that course. A re-measurement reveals that the course was only 42196 (without the scpf) - does the record count???

The answer is yes!

That is what I had assumed, and the 0.1% is the expected maximum variance between two measurers. Though you showed that two A measurers can be much closer than 0.1%. I imagine another factor though is when a course gets re-used year after year without necessarily being remeasured each time. Then suddenly some one sets a national record and the governing body asks for a re-measurement. There were some minor errors in setting up the course, incorrect radius, misplaced turn round point etc. but they were minor and the 42 meters is more than enough to accommodate them.