Valencia race director "(If the) IAAF remeasurement there is one meter less... we will die of shame.”

I'll try again, aren't marathons required to be longer than 42,195 meters for certification? I thought road races were supposed to be 1/100th longer than the stated distance to be a certified course. Or is that only for US certification?

Just measuring the course 3 times would probably yield three different measurements. I've used a measuring wheel around a track and been off by more than a half meter each time.

Easy tiger. In my years living in the west coast I hardly ever heard the expression "will die of shame". On the other hand, when I spent a few seasons in Spain they used the expression quite often.

fisky wrote:

I'll try again, aren't marathons required to be longer than 42,195 meters for certification? I thought road races were supposed to be 1/100th longer than the stated distance to be a certified course. Or is that only for US certification?

Just measuring the course 3 times would probably yield three different measurements. I've used a measuring wheel around a track and been off by more than a half meter each time.

Your premise is close Fisky, but not quite.

When measuring a course for certification (in the US anyway), a measurer must add .1%, as well as following the tangents as the road/path turns (you measure 30cm from the inside of any turn). The measurement work is most commonly done using a Jones Counter on the front wheel of a bicycle, but it can be done using other methods such as a steel tape. Properly following measuring procedures, if there would be a way to do it perfectly which there isn't, would yield a marathon course that is 42.195m (138' 5") longer than the defined marathon distance. In reality, due to human error and the limitations of the equipment we use to measure, every measurement is going to end up a little different, as you note. The additional .1% that we add when we measure a course is done to insure that runners will run at least the advertised race distance.

Then of course the course personnel for a race must set up the course the way the certification map shows. But even if those folks mess up a little, say they place a turn-around cone a little off from where the map indicates, if a record of this nature is set high level measurers will usually come in to perform a post-race measurement. At that point, as long as the course that was actually run comes out to at least the distance advertised (without the .1% added in) everything is okay.

Monti, please correct me if I'm wrong on this, I'm going by what I've read I don't had the high level measurement experience you do!

Monti?

I did it & definitely not a metre shorter :)... 21.2k so 110m longer but that is probably due to me taking a few metres longer on the few bends we had (13 in total)

Exceptional course, with only 27m of elevation & a loss of 33m throughout the whole route.

Btw, I smashed my short term target, that of running 1:20.. did 1:18'33"

Darren.

2012 wrote:

Easy tiger. In my years living in the west coast I hardly ever heard the expression "will die of shame".

Americans are well known for being shameless...maybe more so in California?

Happy to make you smile :-)

Please, excuse my strange English. It's my fault.

About the race... this will be our third WR re-measurement course in 53 weeks (Joyciline 1h04:51, Kebede 1h06:11... and now Kiptum 58:18). When the actual re-measurement is made and the result is notified, we will let you know as soon as the IAAF -which is the one that ratifies or not the WRs- authorized us.

The protagonism is always for the runners. They are the most important. The organizers enjoy making runners happy by running and audience watching the run, but the better organizer is the invisible organizer. I apologize for starring in a thread that I do not deserve (although my bad English maybe?).

Greetings from Valencia for all the family of Letsrun.org

fisky wrote:

Question: Aren't marathons required to be longer than 41,195 meters for certification?

No. 42195, yes. I know what you're asking however. Yes, .1% per mile is added in the measurement - known as the SCPF, short course prevention factor. Fact is, even w/the .1%, a measurer has no way of being certain they're adding that much for various reasons, thus reason to add it. Works out to 5.28 per mile. Pretty sure if a 'verification' ride found the course a meter short, the record would still stand. There's a certain tolerance, the amount I don't recall.

For those that wonder, the method used to measure courses is the BEST available. If there was a better way, we'd use it. It ain't perfect, thus the leeway given (or 'added' w/the SCPF).

There is no tolerance on a short course - even if it one meter short . The performance would not be ratified. That's why there is the SCPF.

Juan Manuel Botella wrote:

Happy to make you smile :-)

Please, excuse my strange English. It's my fault.

About the race... this will be our third WR re-measurement course in 53 weeks (Joyciline 1h04:51, Kebede 1h06:11... and now Kiptum 58:18). When the actual re-measurement is made and the result is notified, we will let you know as soon as the IAAF -which is the one that ratifies or not the WRs- authorized us.

The protagonism is always for the runners. They are the most important. The organizers enjoy making runners happy by running and audience watching the run, but the better organizer is the invisible organizer. I apologize for starring in a thread that I do not deserve (although my bad English maybe?).

Greetings from Valencia for all the family of Letsrun.org

Muchas gracias para tu respuesta, señor. Tu ingles es mejor que mi español.

vivalarepublica wrote:

Juan Manuel Botella wrote:

Happy to make you smile :-)

Please, excuse my strange English. It's my fault.

About the race... this will be our third WR re-measurement course in 53 weeks (Joyciline 1h04:51, Kebede 1h06:11... and now Kiptum 58:18). When the actual re-measurement is made and the result is notified, we will let you know as soon as the IAAF -which is the one that ratifies or not the WRs- authorized us.

The protagonism is always for the runners. They are the most important. The organizers enjoy making runners happy by running and audience watching the run, but the better organizer is the invisible organizer. I apologize for starring in a thread that I do not deserve (although my bad English maybe?).

Greetings from Valencia for all the family of Letsrun.org

Muchas gracias para tu respuesta, señor. Tu ingles es mejor que mi español.

You two are buddies?

No need for Su in Spain. When you talk to someone that is younger or about your same age we always use tu instead of su

Juanma, my only critique towards the 1/2 marathon organisers is the focus you have on WR and African runners, however, there were no pacers for any Spanish runners looking for fast times. I hope that next year you sort out some pacers for any Spanish runner (i.e Abadia) that wants to break 61 minutes for the half, he had to front run 61:18 all alone. Same goes to Callum Hawkins.

LoneStarXC wrote:

vivalarepublica wrote:

Muchas gracias para tu respuesta, señor. Tu ingles es mejor que mi español.

You two are buddies?

I thought we were all friends on the letsrun boards.

LoneStarXC wrote:

Se Habla! wrote:

Nosotros muy embarazadas.

Men don’t get pregnant. Unless you’re a seahorse?

What's the proper way to speak Spanish for people who identify as a different gender?

D.Katz wrote:

There is no tolerance on a short course - even if it one meter short . The performance would not be ratified. That's why there is the SCPF.

Probably a stupid question but: Is a short course on re-measurement defined as shorter than 'distance' plus .1% SCPF or just 'distance'?

For example, if in a marathon the original measurer set the course at 42,238m (42,195 + 43) and a record was set. The post race measurer then checks the course and gets a distance of, say, 42,210m, so it is 15m longer than the marathon distance but 28m shorter than the .1%SPCF, would the record stand?

My feeling is yes as the SPCF added in the initial measurement worked. However, it could be argued that the answer is no as a third, fourth or fifth re-measurement could produce a result that is shorter then 42,195m and the SPCF is there to cover standard deviation in measurement.

Caitlyn Semenya wrote:

LoneStarXC wrote:

Men don’t get pregnant. Unless you’re a seahorse?

What's the proper way to speak Spanish for people who identify as a different gender?

Embarazoso means emabarrasing. However Embarrased is not Embarazado, embarazado only means pregnant in Spanish.

Embarrased=Avergonzado

not a native Anglospeaker wrote:

Whilst he is clearly very passionate about his race, the literal meaning of this has been lost in translation to make it sound a bit obscure in English. It's similar to Kevin Mayer wanting to "express himself 100%" for being the reason he fouled out in the long jump at Euros. English speakers can say similar funny sounding things in other languages that sound normal and natural in their head. I really don't think this is post worthy, but maybe in a monolingual country like America you aren't as use to hearing people express themselves in a foreign language like we are in Europe. For that reason, maybe it is post worthy as it can help you understand other cultures a bit more.

Every nation in the world is actually a melting pot of the whole world that surrounds it, according to its position. They are all like planets in and of themselves, their surface recording and registering the cosmos in all directions around it. With knowledge of many fields in tow, one can examine the linguistics of many nations and see sediment layers of history. Every nation has had shortcomings and triumphs. Spain has been a crossroads and depository of pretty much every religion and world language. Its coast lines and position on the Pillars of Hercules, or, for Muslims, the Mountain of Tariq, has made it a crossroads in all of history. Brahmins, Aryans, Irish, Scythians, Gauls, Phoenicians, Carthaginians, Berbers, Nigers, Nigerians, other sub Saharan West Africans, Ethiopic peoples, Arabs, Romans, Greeks, Hebrews, Visigoths, Vandals, Romans, Christians. Spain was a founding participant in the medieval Scholastic university system. Spain can count itself as having one of the oldest still operating scholastic universities. Like similar ones in Germany, Italy and Poland, any one can study at these great universities sometimes for a fraction of what in state tuition costs in many states and nations at typically priced universities.

These facts are inscribed upon the Spanish language, perhaps influencing its incredibly complex (comparatively) verb conjugations.

No one will die of shame.

Fortunately, no one will die of shame.

IAAF has ratified the WR achieved by Kiptum in Valencia.