Bob and I are hired by another mega-race in D.C. every year to ensure course layout is performed properly, according to Bob's excellent certification map. It is never completely right until we step in. We always need to schlep around a lot of cones in the early morning hours, correcting the configuration. The Ops director of this race just knows the course will be laid out as certified only if Bob and I are on site to make adjustments, despite dozens of course layout volunteers out there, and he knows we'll earn our stipend every race day. We wish there were more like him.
In my experience, few race organizers and course layout staff understand that going around a traffic circle, for instance, on the side it was measured, is not the same as just going around it any old way. They don't understand how laying out cones to allow runners to take the tangent instead of causing them to run to the "wrong" side or down the middle of the road matters.
I understand Bob's frustration about races taking the trouble to certify and then do a sloppy or downright incompetent job of course layout. Especially when we measurers hear about it from participants in a screwed-up event, those participants not grasping that they did not run the course as measured. I hate to seem as though I am discriminating when I say it matters more in some races than others, but I suspect most of us agree, if only in private. Duane includes a disclaimer on all his maps that the course is valid only if laid out properly. A good CYA practice, I suppose. But does doing this actually result in fewer shoddy layouts on certified courses?