Skip to main content

There is another discussion topic on going about certifying intermediate splits under the General Course Measurement Topics. This topic relates to how intermediate splits should be certified. I have seen different certifiers treating this issue in different ways.

Here's the question: Should certified splits be included on the certificate and have the same certification number as for the whole course distance or should each split qualify as a course in its own right and each have its own certificate and own certification number?

In my opinion, the only worthwhile intermediate splits to certify are those where the separation and drop allow for records. I think that under these circumstances, the split should have its own certificate and number. (The issue relating to how the race organizers handle timing is covered under the other topic discussing split certification. Please do not duplicate discussion on this aspect here). In most other cases, an uncertified split is probably pretty good, for example, a half marathon split in a marathon, unless the measurer messed up pretty badly.
Original Post
I would have to agree with you.

The way the course listings are set up, there is a single entry for each course which includes such data as drop and separation. As the drop and separation would be different for each of the certified intermediate splits, it would make sense for each to have its own certificate and course number.

Years ago I adopted a position that if two or more courses were completely colinear and shared a start and finish point (for example, the 5K were the first or last half of a 10K) I would issue one certificate for both distances. That only leads to confusion over which course is which.

Now I'd issue separate certificates. It just isn't that much harder on our forests.

Add Reply

Link copied to your clipboard.