measuring xc courses?

Houston we have a problem(s):

Problem #1

There are different criteria/rules among ours sport's governing bodies (high school, college, USATF) as to where to measurer a cross country course.

Problem #2

Any measuring wheel (rolatape type or bike with a JR/Jones Counter) will have a different calibration for each different surface resulting in an inconsistent accuracy over the varied xc terrain.

Problem #3

It is often very difficult to identify and maintain the boundaries of a xc course therefore makeing problem #1 more of a problem!

Problem #4

It's cross country! It's silly to try and compare times from one course to another.

BUT! - there is no reason why with all of the blood, sweat, and tears by the athletes over decades, meet managment can't spend a couple of days and go out and do it right with a tape measure!

One other note - Wineturtle, thank you for the compliment. But here in the US we are very fortunate in having many excellent measuerers (some better than me).

J.R. wrote:

[quote]Jones Counter Critic wrote:

The Jones Counter is NOT accurate unless you can maintain precise speed throughout the measurement process, just like most wheels that CLICK at each revolution.

That is total hogwash. The Jones Counter is the standard for course measurement and certification. You do not need to keep a precise speed. The counter does not click.

There sure are a lot of stupid people in the world, who have opinions about things of which they know nothing.

Get a continuos gear driven wheel, practice keeping the wheel stable and call it good[quote]

Again, a wheel is NOT ACCURATE. If you're doing to do something like that, there are many ways to check a course and get a false reading.

I like how the Jones Counter attached to a bicycle wheel is considered totally accurate but any other measuring wheel is not.

Can the measuring experts explain their devotion to an antiquated devise (THE Jones Counter) that requires detail to several varaibles to get multiple distances for the same course - then after picking the longest measurement they still want a correction factor added to further lengthen the distance!??!?!

You are very good. half a count in a mile is 5cm in 1600m or 160,000 cm, 3 parts in a million, for the mile. 3 counts is a foot or 30cm; in 10km there are, 1,000,000cm, so 30 parts in a million. 5 cm in a mile amounts to less than 0.01 seconds. 30 cm is covered in about 5 hundredths of a second -- no inaccuracy of any import.

J.R. wrote:

The tires should be fully inflated.

The bicycle is calibrated before, and after the measurements of the course. The most conservative calibration is the one that is used.

I use a 200 meter calibration course to measure my practice courses. I have ridden 10k race courses and come within 3 counts with repeat measurements, and consistently within 1/2 count for repeat measurements of one mile training loops.

The counter is placed on the front wheel of the bicycle, there are 20 counts for each revolution of the wheel, and each count represents approximately 4 1/4 inches.

How many meters to the mile?

^1609.344 (and this is exact, not rounded)

I'm surprised so many people care about an XC's course length to the exact centimeter considering the general feeling of "times don't matter." In Europe, no one worries about standard lengths when it comes to cross country. Sure, they'll measure the distance and tell you it's about 10.43k or 6.78k (they usually are just random like that) and give you a rough estimate, but it's always done after the course has already been set, just so people know about how far they're racing.

Meter Man wrote:

Again, a wheel is NOT ACCURATE. If you're doing to do something like that, there are many ways to check a course and get a false reading.

I like how the Jones Counter attached to a bicycle wheel is considered totally accurate but any other measuring wheel is not.

Can the measuring experts explain their devotion to an antiquated devise (THE Jones Counter) that requires detail to several varaibles to get multiple distances for the same course - then after picking the longest measurement they still want a correction factor added to further lengthen the distance!??!?![/quote]

Starting w/my brother-in-measuring DKatz' recommendation to measure xc courses w/a steel tape: that is all well & good but I'll bet only 1 in 1000 courses are measured that way. Too labor intensive is 90% of the reason. I maintain that for xc courses, use of a calibrated measuring wheel is just fine. If possible, set the cal course up on a representative patch of the xc course to be measured. Since all xc courses are on irregular surfaces, it wouldn't be out of line to add a couple feet to 1 meter to each mile to help ensure accuracy. Short of exacting steel taping, you'll never know for sure how accurate each mile is but using methods I describe above, you're gonna be darn close - certainly more than close enough. Being able to compare times run over the same course is more valuable than knowing the precise distance.

To the posters comments: using the Jones counter isn't considered totally accurate. It IS considered the best tool available to measure road courses. If something better was out there, the measuring community would be all over it.

Per the Jones counter being antiquated - only partially true. A new version had to be manufactured as parts for the old became unavailable. This was in the past few years. Yes, it's very similar to the old one. We are devoted to it because, as I've said above, proven to be the most accurate tool available. Simple as that. It's been in use for over 30 years, so, clearly has a proven track record w/no naysayers that I'm aware of. And engineers, folks that love their numbers and gadgets, all approve the counter.

Measuring road courses w/the counter is a matter of math and riding the shortest possible route - often putting yourself in harm's way. We want the course to be at least sa long as it should be and because of that, we add the SCPF, short course prevention factor of .1% to each measurement. Hey, we admit we don't know PRECISELY how long each measured course is so to help ensure it's long enough, we go w/the longest of at least 2 measurments and add the SCPF. You might say we're adding 5.28' per mile. We would say we don't know for sure we're adding that much because we don't know how straight our path was around the course, what bump cause an extra count, etc. The point - we don't really know how much of the SCPF we're really adding to each measured segement due to the human error factor and other obstacles encountered.

I hope this info helps.

Since the 30 year old Jones Counter has been retired I'll have to order a new version and see if I can create the same deviations I got with my original one based on different speeds. I have also found several bicycle compters that show speed and distance to the hundreth that are accurate at all speeds and I don't need to calibrate each time I plan on measuring and don't need to calculate my count with them.

For cross country courses, in my opinion, a good continuous gear drive wheel will be as accurate as the measurer using it, and I would be surprised if someone with a steel tape, or Jones Counter on a bike would show much in course length difference.

Not sure what the question is about -- I was trying to get a notion of the accuracy. using 5 instead of 2.125 x 2.54(half of 4.25) and 1600 instead of 1609.344 do not have an important effect the order-of magnitude accuracy calculations, since it is only on the differential. the 2.125 is clearly not accurate to 9.344 parts in 1609.344, and that is what matters for that relative calculation.

J.R. wrote:

How many meters to the mile?

Meter Man

WOW!

"For cross country courses, in my opinion, a good continuous gear drive wheel will be as accurate as the measurer using it, and I would be surprised if someone with a steel tape, or Jones Counter on a bike would show much in course length difference."

Didn't you read the study at the beginning of this thread?

The accuracy of ANY wheel is highly dependent on the surface wich is not the case with a steel tape.

Using a measuring wheel or bike on a non paved surface is difficult to maintain constant surface contact and a straight path.

I would like to see data comparing a full xc course measured with a steel tape vs. bike vs. measuring wheel.

In the 1950`s the 2.5 VCP finish line was a hand full of lime spread at a point 10paces west of the tree then turn 15 paces north or something like that. Nobody gave a crap about counting Mr Joneses revolutions. You got the start by getting a gunny sack with the quarter mile long twine from the parkies office at the stadium. Then knotting it to the metal pole by the cowpath and swinging an arc with the other end tied on the wobbly wheeled single bucket lime liner used to make lanes on the cinder track.

Bet 10 to one they got the 440 measure by laying twine around the track tying on a new piece when they ran out of twine until it was long enough to circle the track once.

from here to the corner house! once around the reservoir!from here to the backstop and back!the three sewer sprint were official distances

first on there wins!

Then no one could beat me to the oak tree. Now everyone can but it`s still fun and the tree is a hella lot bigger now.

David -

I appreciate your views, and maybe, just maybe I had a bad Jones Counter - but my tests do not match the tests in the article presented. My wheels do not vary anywhere near what was presented in the article on any of the surfaces presented in the article. I also do not like all of the calculations/recalibrations required of the Jones Counter.

The steel tape is a very accurate method of course measurement. But I have found that on a cross country course, with many turns, that the time required to layout a precise tangent or precise center curve with a steel tape is not worth the time and in the end my wheel result was so close to my steel tape result that I could not justify that process.

I also coach and it is simply impossible to steel tape a course before we race it. Yet, while walking a course tour and warming up on the course I can easily get a very good gauge on the length of the course with my GPS and my wheel.

It's amazing on how often the two are within one or two meters over 5k! It's also amazing how often both are basically showing a course layout of say 100m short and the majority of my kids run 20-30 second season best times. Now my research, procedures, and measurements may not be perfect but I'm quick, consistant and free.

Meter Man wrote:

I like how the Jones Counter attached to a bicycle wheel is considered totally accurate but any other measuring wheel is not.

Not totally accurate, but much more accurate as compared to most other methods.

[quoteCan the measuring experts explain their devotion to an antiquated devise (THE Jones Counter) that requires detail to several varaibles to get multiple distances for the same course - then after picking the longest measurement they still want a correction factor added to further lengthen the distance!??!?![/quote]

That was quite a confusing sentence! I don't add any correction factor. That is an administrative detail related to certification, not to measurement. I used to certify courses but haven't for quite a long time, and just measure my own courses now.

I meant to add that using a bicycle with a Jones Counter helps to keep the wheel in a straight line, and the person's weight on the bicycle helps to keep the wheel from bouncing along. This is much more accurate than pushing a wheel, where there is no such consistency.

Thank you!

Meter Man wrote:

Since the 30 year old Jones Counter has been retired I'll have to order a new version and see if I can create the same deviations I got with my original one based on different speeds. I have also found several bicycle compters that show speed and distance to the hundreth that are accurate at all speeds and I don't need to calibrate each time I plan on measuring and don't need to calculate my count with them.

Bike computers show hundredths, all right, of a mile, which is 52.80 feet. So, all you're really saying is that you're consistently within 52.8 feet per mile. In case you hadn't noticed, that's not worth diddly-squat for accuracy.

Also, FYI, I've tried bike computers for measuring also, and routinely get 1, 2 or 3 missed impulses per mile, which throws off the calibrated measurement too much to use it for certification purposes.

I worked with another member of my running club who did not think he needed to calibrate before measuring, either. His measurements were always way off (think 80+ feet over 5 miles) what I measured, and were thus unusable.

As someone else noted, measurers are *always* looking for better ways to do it. The J-R counter is cheap, quick and works backwards and forwards (that backwards is handy when you overshoot a mark a little bit - try doing that with a bike computer).

J.R. wrote:

I meant to add that using a bicycle with a Jones Counter helps to keep the wheel in a straight line, and the person's weight on the bicycle helps to keep the wheel from bouncing along. This is much more accurate than pushing a wheel, where there is no such consistency.

Remember, the OP was asking about measuring CC Courses.

Biking a CC Course and keeping a straight line seems more difficult than wheeling with steady pressure while walking or jogging the course. Also, my wheel doesn't bounce.

My bike computer also does hundreths of a kilometer, which still in your mind is highly inaccurate...however, I have yet to be off by more than a few lengths of a bike when doing 12.5 laps at the local track to double check a 5k. Every test has come out a few lengths long and I would guess it is because I'm a few extra inches off of the curb on the curves.

Also, I use my bike to rough out course lengths, then finalize kilometer and miles with a wheel that works perfectly both backwards and forward - because of the continuous gear just like the Jones Counter.

Lastly, most college cross country 8ks are off by way more than 80 feet and that creates great discussion on these boards...and 80 feet is how many seconds at 5:00 pace - 5?

Thread Follower wrote:

Remember, the OP was asking about measuring CC Courses.

Biking a CC Course and keeping a straight line seems more difficult than wheeling with steady pressure while walking or jogging the course. Also, my wheel doesn't bounce.

A course is a course.

Straight line or curve, wherever the course goes it is easier to keep on that line with a bicycle than a wheel. The bicycle always has the same weight on the ground, the same weight on the wheel and is always following the line of the course.

That is not possible to do with a wheel, regardless that you think it might be. And a bicycle odometer is not accurate, as you can travel 4 inches and be off by 7 feet on the reading. I don't know what you are even arguing about, as you admit being within a country mile is close enough for you anyway. In that case just any method that you wish.

You guys are all stuck in the past. Obviously, the best way to measure a course is with a Forerunner. I can't believe how many races I've run that have been mismeasured. Thank god for my Forerunner.

It's an interesting study but fails to consider the possibility of randomization of errors and that most would cancel out over a longer course.