Skip to main content

Reply to "Left lane restriction vs SPR"

This is an important issue and it comes up all the time.

Here's my rules (I'm very open to reproach if I'm doing it wrong...)

1. First, we need excellent, and updated, communication between measurer and organizer. We need to make the organizer understand that we will measure shoulder-to-shoulder unless we actually have assurance of physically indicated restriction(s). That means traffic safety cones, or fences, or many human volunteers.

When in doubt, measure the shoulder-to-shoulder SPR.

2. Any restriction in a USA road race must be clearly indicated on the map. We need to have the organizer agree that the course must be setup that way, or it is setup incorrectly.

3. In my view, verbal instructions alone to the runners is not sufficient to constitute a restriction. If instructions are all the race will offer, then I will measure shoulder-to-shoulder because the savvy runner will run the perceived SPR, and I so advise the organizer.

I have seen some marathons that surprised in a good way by actually having thousands of traffic safety cones lining the entire route to restrict runners to one specific lane or lane part. That's impressive. I don't know where all those cones come from! In the USA we must indicate all restrictions unambiguously on the map and we must measure according to those restrictions.

I had one huge disappointment in an 8K. The organizer asserted he had use of the entire road and that one long curvy road in particular would be closed to traffic. I measured the shoulder-to-shoulder SPR. Come race day, the police had changed their mind, kept the road open. They did provide hundreds of cones to restrict the runners to the right-side edge of the road. I wish I had been informed -- the runners were penalized by running a course made long by a legitimate physical restriction that the measurer was not aware of. Ugh! Nobody will lose a record in this example, but the times were suppressed by a few extra neters. My bad for not ensuring tighter measurer-organizer communication.

JJ
×
×
×
×