Several races may share one course, or a race my be now run on a course that was previously used for another extinct event.
I think we should name courses for the location and distance, not for the event. Courses have a minimum 10 year life span, and when re-measured can go on for ever. Race names often have much shorter lives.
I think it is a very bad idea for a certification name to be misleading. Therefor the prior posting suggesting the name have the correct length is very sound.
We can't control event names, but we can encourage RD's not to run mislabeled races, or to mislead the public about the length.
We can do this by pointing out that:
- Many runners now wear GPS units.
- The RD will get a lot of flack if runners think the length is way out.
- That when courses are found to be the wrong length it brings the event into disrepute.
- That an astute runner WILL check the online copy of the course certification, if only to get the course number for his runner log.
- That locals who learn from the grape vine that the course was the 'wrong length', (not as advertised), will stay away in droves.
- When a course is short it's seems to be a con, but when it is way to long peoples times will be disappointing and they won't want to come back. Either way, it dampens repeat business.
While triathlons may talk of bikes, breaks, drafting, wet suits and Hawaii, the average runner only talks about shoes, splits and courses.
Getting the course wrong means time and splits are wrong. Not a way to make for happy runners.
Education is the answer.