Pete:
I must confess I have not thought much about double lines for uncertified splits as I only ever have made one determination on them. I feel confident about their location if I get a very small percentage difference between the determinations on the overall course. The change to the requirement that no new lines should be made on the second ride was obviously a good move except that it went just a little too far. It should have specified that if the second ride was going to produce a longer overall course, a mark showing this should be placed beyond the first set of marks. Without the need for calculation of a course adjustment, the “Course Measurement Data Sheet” could thus have been made much simpler and clearer.
You tell me that most measurers are ignoring the recommended procedure to make course adjustments with a steel rule, so evidently they are following the same methods that I am advocating. At variance with this though is the fact that Justin’s latest spreadsheet gives a result for course adjustment in meters. Justin are you making adjustments with a steel rule?
Although general course adjustments currently approved by RRTC involve unnecessary conversions to standard units and use of a steel rule, there are some occasions where this is necessary. For instance a measurer may find he needs an adjustment after completion of a post-calibration at a point distance from the race course, and may have to ask the race director to do it. However, use of the tire-pressure monitoring method I am developing would eliminate post-calibration and the need for even these adjustments.