quote:
Originally posted by Pete Riegel:
MY OPINIONS ON THE VARIOUS DISCUSSION TOPICS
A.How long should we save Certificate and who should save them?
The registrar should save copies of certificates for all active courses. This implies ten years. Electronic copies may exist, but paper should be saved for ten years.
B.Maps requirements – only Black Print(no pictures, no pencil and no grayscale)
I agree
C.Should we appoint a good measurer’s to Final Signatory status?
No. Final Signatory is given as an award for past service. I know from certifying the work of others that some people’s work needs closer examination than others. Let’s keep FS for those who have earned it through service to RRTC.
D.Annual checking by Regional Certifier’s of their maps being posted online. How can this be done?
I just did this for all my active courses, and, to my surprise, found none missing. It took hours. If I had not kept a personal listing of my certified courses I would have had to go to the individual paper files, which would have taken days. If a few courses get lost, and the certifier doesn’t notice, is this a problem? Are we getting complaints that we’ve been unable to resolve?
E. Should there be any renewals done just for 2011?
Yes. We committed to it and should honor our commitment.
F.Do we need a Code of ethics for Certifiers
No. That's right up there with loyalty oaths.
G.Insurance and USATF Certified Official status for Course Measurers
H.We need to make up a test for the Association Level.
The above two topics are presented as though it’s a done deal. As I see it, it’s proposed that RRTC people become members of the Officials Committee in order to get free insurance which covers measuring accidents. The details are missing. For example, must the race in question be associated in some way with USATF? Most of the races I measure for are not.
Being a USATF Official will not help me to certify courses, and aside from whatever value the unspecified insurance may have, I have zero interest in being an official at any level. Years ago I bought an umbrella policy for $1,000,000. It costs me $100 per year, and covers anything that’s not covered by my homeowners and auto insurance.
There is no free lunch. If RRTC people become officials, we may well be bound by the rules and procedures of the Officials Committee. I do not know what these may be, but am reluctant to sign on a blank check. I am in RRTC to measure and certify road race courses, and to do what I can to preserve the technical integrity of what we do. My interest ends there. I think it will be a mistake if we agree to become a part of the Officials Committee. I am sure there will be an administrative burden if we agree to meld our services with the Officials Committee.
The request for a Twenty Questions test is premature, as we have not yet agreed to become officials. We in RRTC don’t need Twenty Questions, as we can read the capability of a measurer by examination of the submitted paperwork.
We in RRTC are, person for person, the most effective group in USATF, in my view. For this reason we are seen as a resource by others. We are capable of doing more than we are doing, but isn’t what we do enough? For decades we have had to fend off various changes brought by non-RRTC people which seek to add to our work, and in areas that do not directly impinge on course measurement and certification. I have a feeling that getting cozy with the Officials people will lead to lots of political activity which will sap our enthusiasm.
I am against RRTC becoming an arm of the Officials Committee. They are decent folks, but we do not need what they have to offer.
I.How many times should we allow an adjustment be made to a Certified Course and the Expiration Date should not be given a new 10 year life!
It is 5090.63 meters from the east edge of the bricks on Broad Street at High street to the lightpole at the northeast corner of Broad and Parkview. This was measured in 2008. It’s one of the building blocks of the Columbus Marathon. It will remain 5090.63 meters until roadwork changes the pavement or the lightpole. Annual adjustments of the course are common. When I have to change the course, I remeasure only the changed portions of the course to come up with the final course, and then do a whole-course ride to set out the new splits. Thus the next time the course changes the segment in question will show as having been measured once in 2008 and once in the year the course next changes. I believe this methodology is solid. When I’m done I issue a certificate to expire ten years from present date.
I am reluctant to issue a certificate to anyone who wants to adjust a course measured by another person.
I believe this subject does not solve an existing problem, and wonder why we should set it in stone. Are we paranoid that people will try to pervert our system?
J.Should Certificates will be posted online?
All the relevant data relating to the course already appears in the course list, except for the contact info for the race director. It’s nice to have certificates online, but it takes extra effort which may be wasted by duplicating what’s now available. Questions arising can be easily answered by looking at the certificate, wherever it is.
L.How to handle measurer’s that don’t respond the Regional Certifier’s?
I answer communications from measurers, and others, promptly. If they don’t get back to me, I follow up in a few days. If I get no more communication from the measurer, I consider them not interested and drop it until they wake up. Actually, this has not been a problem for me, as the measurers I work with are responsive.
I an curious about what the certifier may wish the measurer to do? If it has to do with a course under review, I'm sure the response will be quick. If it's something else the certifier wants, what might it be? I have no authority over the measurers I work with except as regards the quality of their work.
Pete, Thanks for your input as it will be noted at the meeting. Best,Gene
