Skip to main content

2012 Meeting Highlights

1.Duane Russell is going to list the requirements for measurers to follow. This will be displayed on the website. It will be on the search page: at or on a popup page to be linked directly from that search engine -- just like the "Explanation of Fields" page is linked from the Certified course search engine. Once this list of requirements is online, it will justify removing measurers who don't satisfy the requirements.

2.The word “Replace” will be removed from the Certificate, but will appear on the application for Certification. Instead, the word "Replaces" (on the application for certification) will be effectively redefined to mean that the replaced course is unusable. Thus, it will be a single item asking to enter the number of an old course that has been physically altered and is no longer usable as certified.

3.“Validated” indicates the Athletes ran the course correctly. However, if the course length is checked then this indicates the course was “Verified”. We decided that, based on existing IAAF and USATF rules, we need to alter language on our Certificates and several places in our Manual. We agreed not to change the title of "Validation Chair." The remaining item is our Validation policy web page at and, in that case, Bob Baumel and I need to work through it and decide what changes are needed. We will explain the exact meanings of the terms "Validation" and "Verification."

4.The” Measurement Workshop Chair “position will be replaced with “Education and Training Chair”. Jim Gerweck will be writing the duties of this person(he will have this for the Chair by Jan 1st 2013 and it will be posted online). One basic thing that will be done is make a uniform way to present a measurement workshops, which can be done by Jim or any Certifier.

5.Discussed before meeting about the type of finish description in the middle of a parking lot/field. I will post some thought s on this on our BB. Basically any finish using a single point as description for the S/F will not be acceptable. After comments expressed online, the RRTC will have a general plan for all to follow.

6.We are going to establish an Award in the Name of Paul Hronjak. This will be presented at our Annual meeting to a person who has done an outstanding job for the RRTC.
Details to Follow!

7.Cal course data should be consistent. When doing a ride there should not be a difference of more than 2 or 3 counts in each direction. If this occurs then the measurer should do some additional rides. Again, this information will be distributed to our certifiers.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I have a question on #7, mainly because I use a cal course that I consistently get 4-5 clicks more in one direction than the other. For example I'd get something like:


So is that OK because the rides in the same direction are only a click or so off, or do the all the rides have to be within a click or 2?

Paul Hronjak and I theorized about the various reasons. Clearly it had something to do with the cal course being slightly uphill in one direction, downhill in the other, but exactly why it would cause that effect we never nailed down. In any case he accepted the measurements because the rides consistently gave the same directional error.

Flat spots long enough (and safe enough) to put a cal course on a few and far between around here, and my experience has been courses with even a slight elevation change will yield different measurements in each direction.
To Keith's question about differential between reverse directions: my understanding is that most of this is due to weight distribution on the bike. If you're going uphill more of your weight is supported on the back wheel so the front wheel is effectively just a little larger (fewer counts); riding downhill more weight is on the front wheel, reducing its effective diameter (more counts).
If there is a lot of wind you may notice that riding into the wind you get fewer counts than riding with the wind. Same reason, the wind is pushing back on your sail (you) and putting more weight onto the back wheel.
Of course if you have a really strong wind or a really steep hill you get the opposite effect since it's hard to steer straight in those conditions (so more counts).
You can test this out if you want to. Try riding downhill but lean back, try to put no weight on your handlebars. You may be able to see a reduction in this effect-- but I don't think you can eliminate the effect that way as there is still the weight on your pedals and seat, and due to the slope there will still be more weight on the front wheel compared to level riding.

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.