Race Directors: Best way to measure/certify a course?

dukerdog wrote:

Why doesn't USATF come up with a second level of certification? You wheel off a quarter mile, calibrate your bike computer to it, and then go measure your course. Presto, B-level certified.

I don't really understand what this buys you. Course certification isn't that complicated. In all honesty, the method shown for using a bike computer is more difficult than using a Jones Counter. The only advantage is cost.

A normal certification is simple:

Calibrate your bike (I have a couple premeasured courses)

Ride the course twice (within tolerance)

Recalibrate your bike

Document what you did

Draw a map

Without documentation, how would the person giving out the "B" certification wasn't done with a 67 VW Microbus? Without a map how do you put the course back next year?

One of the most time consuming things is the calibrate and double ride, and there's no way around that, so I don't see a value in a "B" level. Maybe I'm missing something, but is it really that hard to fill out a couple page form and draw a map?

I wasn't suggesting the method from the bike computer website, but I was suggesting that there would be a specific proceedure with a measuring wheel and bike (you wouldn't be allowed to use a VW Microbus). The proceedure would be a lot simplier than the current one and would require equipment that your average race director already has, or knows somebody that has. Your average race director does not have a Jones counter and he does not have a couple pre-measured calibration courses.

There would be documentation but it would consist only of the names of the streets or trails that were followed in order, and then details of where the start, finish, and turn-around points were, such as "finish line is 123 feet east of the intersection of street A and avenue B.

Another time consuming thing is laying out your calibration course and it requires two people. I would allow the calibration course to be laid out with a wheel so it would require only one person and less time. I would require only a single ride. No, it's not as accurate, but if it had been done for the last half marathon race I ran, the course might have been 13.17 miles rather than 13.5.

Apparently most race directors feel that it is, because 90% of the races I run are not certified.

The problem with many wheels (at least cheap ones) is they can bounce and mismeasure. If your calibration course is off, that's multiplied 'x' times, and you might as well use a VW.

You can also use an electronic distance meter to set up your calibration course. These used to be quite expensive, but have gotten quite reasonable. Not that much more than a good wheel, or better yet simply borrow or rent one.

I also don't buy the gripe that there's not premeasured courses around. I'd be willing to bet that if someone simply looked at the calibration course list online they could get quite a list of premeasued courses. I found 37 in North Carolina.

That's basically what the current documentation is.

We'll just have to disagree on that one. I'd never trust a measurement done with only one ride. The secondary purpose of the second ride it to make sure to didn't screw up the first one, so I wouldn't assume that a single ride would have solved the problem you noted.

The problem may not be the paperwork, but simply the availability of people willing to take the time to measure properly and the knowledge of where to find them. I get calls every month from race directors wanting me to measure their course. Unfortunately they call me a week or two before the race. Nine times out of 10 I don't have time with such short notice.

You apparently aren't very familiar with cource measurement procedures and how to find certified courses (no slam, just an observation). From comments I see here from time to time you're not really a minority. You also have a concern that courses you run aren't certified.

I'd like to suggest that you download a copy of the course measurement procedures, get yourself a Jones counter, and start measuring courses. It's not all that bad. I use a spreadsheet to speed the paperwork I'd be happy to send to you. Talk to your state certifier and see what others in your area charge (I charge $150 for up to a 10K). For sure it's not going to make you rich, but you'll get a little spare change and some satisfaction knowing you're helping runners in your area (and yourself) run accurately measured courses.

You're asking USATF how to measure a course? USATF can't even measure their own courses correctly.

a lady wrote:

You're asking USATF how to measure a course? USATF can't even measure their own courses correctly.

a lady, I'll assume you're refering to the Papa Johns 10 mile course. If you've been able to follow all that transpired w/that course, it WAS certified at 10 miles and '02 PJ officials arbitrarily moved the start line forward-thus voiding the USATF certification. This news didn't surface until after I'd performed a validation of the course & learned the course runners used raceday in '03 & '04 was short. If this isn't the course you refer to, please provide an example(s) of those you leave unnamed.

dukerdog, you know I'm on your side in this pursuit of accurate courses. Nothing I'd like more. I cringe when I hear how some are measured and don't want to know about measuring methods in other instances. Feel caught; I want to know...but don't. As I've said in the past, of courses I've measured, about 90% were laid out short. I always ask where I can add distance before I start because of this.

About the only savings I can see in your 'B' status idea is: money. Money, I think, is probably why most don't get their courses certified. And, a 'B' status course would still require USATF to issue a letter of certification which, as has been pointed out, means a map w/specifics about start and finish locales, any turnaround points, how less than the SPR is enforced, etc.

As I mentioned earlier, USATF would never be party to a system that acknowledges accuracy that's open to 'operator/mechanism' variances. What I'd feel comfortable with is granting 'B' status to courses that show a course measured w/a Jones counter using a 1000' cal course measured via steel tape or by survey. When asked to simply measure a course accurately, that's how I operate.

I use a string.

Is the problem really a lack of people to do the certification? Do you guys have more people willing to pay you for certifying than you can do the work for?

I do have an interest in getting into the course measurement thing (already have a Jones counter), but if I start spending half of every other Saturday out measuring courses, my wife will kill me and the local running community will be right back where they started.

Scotth, maybe I'll go out with you one of these times. Let me know next time you're doing a course in my neck of the woods.

But I still think a B-level certification is a good idea!

In MI, there's a lack of people to certify courses. Two of us that've done the bulk of measuring the past 20 years have grown weary of it. When I'm doing it, I'm into it but my enthusiasm has eroded overall. I'd say the main reason courses don't get certified is the cost. Secondly, many simply don't know or appreciate what it's all about.

Carl Rundell has certified a course. Did a nice job.

Yes, I'll be sure to let you know next time I'm in your area. We need new blood!

In my area, yes. For sure I have a few people that think I need to do it out of the goodness of my heart, but I find putting a price on it not only means you plan to be serious about it but also deters the folks that have some vague idea about a course and would like you to measure several to see how they turn out. (yes, I get this)

Know that one. At least people will benefit until you die, the you'll have lots of people at the funeral! ;-) Seriously, I think that's the core problem. I've taught a half dozen folks to do measurement, lent them my gear, but only one has done more than one course. If more poeple took the time, there would be more certified courses.

Maybe we should teach priests and nuns to measure courses. They're already celebate so they shouldn't have a problem measuring courses every Sunday morning. Sound feasible?