I moved Lyman's new question to this new thread.
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I just had a request to design a 5K course. I replied with an attachment of a course in this client's region that I certified months ago. She replied that it looked perfect for them. She asked if I could put their race name on it and remove the old race name. I said "sure", happy to do it for you. My assumption is that since the certification number does not change, anyone checking could easily look it up with the certification #.
Am I going out of bounds here? Do I really need to re-submit it for the USATF database? If so, I will have to charge something for my time rather than just trying to make a friend. What do we charge for this?
Am I going out of bounds here? Do I really need to re-submit it for the USATF database? If so, I will have to charge something for my time rather than just trying to make a friend. What do we charge for this?
Lyman, please see the policy on this. I feel since it was certified last year, then a new certificate should be issued by your regional Certifier. Your map should include this new race name. Give your regional Certifier the details so he can issue a 2012 number following the policy. The charge for this is $10.
If this happened to be a change because of your mistake in naming the race or the regional Certifier, then that's a different This appears to be a different situation.
If this happened to be a change because of your mistake in naming the race or the regional Certifier, then that's a different This appears to be a different situation.
Lyman, what happens when the client for whom you originally measured the course goes online and sees their listing is no longer there? Trouble for sure.
What I would do (and Gene & others correct me if I'm wrong here) is modify the map w/ the new name, and issue a NEW certificate and number. That way each race has "ownership" of the course.
Of course, the one that paid to have it certified might feel a bit more "ownership" than the one who "pirated" it.
Kind of grey area/can of worms here, but this gives some ammo to Duane's point that we certify courses, not events. Here's a case where "Memorial Park 5 km" would be a lot better name than "Joe's Garage Dipstick Dash."
What I would do (and Gene & others correct me if I'm wrong here) is modify the map w/ the new name, and issue a NEW certificate and number. That way each race has "ownership" of the course.
Of course, the one that paid to have it certified might feel a bit more "ownership" than the one who "pirated" it.
Kind of grey area/can of worms here, but this gives some ammo to Duane's point that we certify courses, not events. Here's a case where "Memorial Park 5 km" would be a lot better name than "Joe's Garage Dipstick Dash."
Lyman,
I miss understood your situation. I see someone is asking that they use another groups course. see policy again here. You shouldn't do this as the other group paid you for their course.
Basically, if they want their own identity for this course then the policy must be followed. It's not a question of you losing a client, but a question of ethics.
I miss understood your situation. I see someone is asking that they use another groups course. see policy again here. You shouldn't do this as the other group paid you for their course.
Basically, if they want their own identity for this course then the policy must be followed. It's not a question of you losing a client, but a question of ethics.
Gene you say see policy on this what I am wondering is there another manual or other reading material besides the manual to measure a course? If so where can I find all the different policies on measuring?
Go to www.rrtc.net and you will find the policy on changing a race name among other things.
We've had this situation twice. Two race directors wanted to use a course already certified for another race. I provided the certifying race directors' name and let the new race directors ask if the course could be used. In both cases the new race ran on the already certified course. The new races each listed the appropriate certification code on their race applications. I don't believe the race directors in one of my examples knows there is a certified course database. The other knows but didn't ask for a new map or have any problem with what ever name the course had in the database.
My examples also provide support for Duane's position since none of the 4 race directors involved cares about course names in the certified course database. However, since they don't care, why change rules/procedures that they are unaware of? The $10.00 solution would have easily resolved any concerns from any of the 4 race directors about the name of the course in the database.
In Lyman's example above, the new race director wanted a map with the new course name on it. If the original (certifying) race director agreed, the title block on the map could simply be changed to show the new race name with the original certification code, no new certification or course number. The new title block could have the words "Originally certified as "Joe's 5K" in 2012". Lyman could charge whatever he believes the market will bear for the map change.
My bottom line here is that the race director who pays for (or measures for) the course to be certified should not be told he/she can't have their race name on the course.
My examples also provide support for Duane's position since none of the 4 race directors involved cares about course names in the certified course database. However, since they don't care, why change rules/procedures that they are unaware of? The $10.00 solution would have easily resolved any concerns from any of the 4 race directors about the name of the course in the database.
In Lyman's example above, the new race director wanted a map with the new course name on it. If the original (certifying) race director agreed, the title block on the map could simply be changed to show the new race name with the original certification code, no new certification or course number. The new title block could have the words "Originally certified as "Joe's 5K" in 2012". Lyman could charge whatever he believes the market will bear for the map change.
My bottom line here is that the race director who pays for (or measures for) the course to be certified should not be told he/she can't have their race name on the course.
Thanks Gene
Guido, if the race agreed to this name change then a new certificate would be issued. The old certificate would still be part of the database as they may want to use their course in the future. The regional Certifier would need proof that this is agreed by the original race. Next, the Certifier would issue a certificate as indicated by the policy.
This probably doesn't happen often. I have never seen it happen in all my years as a Certifier.
This probably doesn't happen often. I have never seen it happen in all my years as a Certifier.
I don’t have a dog in this fight, as I no longer measure nor certify.
However, it strikes me that this name-change brouhaha is an unnecessary complication to what should be simple.
I propose ceasing to process name changes for race courses. If anyone wants to use the course, they are free to use the course number in their advertising. Yes, it may make it more difficult for someone to locate the course in the database. This may stimulate the use of course numbers.
We cannot be all things to all people, and one name for a course, along with a unique number, is enough.
I will not be offended if this unsolicited advice is ignored.
However, it strikes me that this name-change brouhaha is an unnecessary complication to what should be simple.
I propose ceasing to process name changes for race courses. If anyone wants to use the course, they are free to use the course number in their advertising. Yes, it may make it more difficult for someone to locate the course in the database. This may stimulate the use of course numbers.
We cannot be all things to all people, and one name for a course, along with a unique number, is enough.
I will not be offended if this unsolicited advice is ignored.
I've done this twice. Once when an RD had two races, one in the spring and one in the fall, and he wanted to use the same course for them. The second time two RD's decided to share the cost of certification and use the same course. Just sent in a second map to the vice-chair with a new name on the top. Both times it was very simple with no brouhaha involved. 
Mark, did you issue a separate cert # for the shared course? I'm just wondering if that database can handle 2 entries w/ the same cert #.
Different cert numbers
MI12001MN & MI12003MN
MI12002MN & MI12004MN
MI12012MN & MI12014MN
MI12001MN & MI12003MN
MI12002MN & MI12004MN
MI12012MN & MI12014MN
If we didn't put names on the course map, and courses were only known by cert numbers, there wouldn't be a naming issue.
The map on the USATF site would only show the cert number. The cert would show who originally paid to have the course measured.
If the measurer's client wanted a map with their name on it, the measurer would create that. The cert map would not show that name, but the event would have their name added to the certificate map. No problem. That is easy to do.
Another event wants to use the course. That event contacts the measurer, who contacts the original event. Asks permission to "share" the course, or tells the new event to contact the original event director, and have the original event director respond (to measurer) as to agreement, or not. I always recommend at "donation" to the original event, which has always been paid (western folks are more neighborly, maybe).
Either way, only the measurer would be involved in this "adding a name to a map" process. Not the certifier, not the VC, not the Registrar. We just need to be sure to tell all of our race directors to reference the cert number in all of their advertising. If they don't, it's still no issue for us.
This whole thread is why I believe we should only use the certificate number on the map, and not name courses. We are trying to have two unique identifiers, but the name can change. Only the cert number is really static.
The map on the USATF site would only show the cert number. The cert would show who originally paid to have the course measured.
If the measurer's client wanted a map with their name on it, the measurer would create that. The cert map would not show that name, but the event would have their name added to the certificate map. No problem. That is easy to do.
Another event wants to use the course. That event contacts the measurer, who contacts the original event. Asks permission to "share" the course, or tells the new event to contact the original event director, and have the original event director respond (to measurer) as to agreement, or not. I always recommend at "donation" to the original event, which has always been paid (western folks are more neighborly, maybe).
Either way, only the measurer would be involved in this "adding a name to a map" process. Not the certifier, not the VC, not the Registrar. We just need to be sure to tell all of our race directors to reference the cert number in all of their advertising. If they don't, it's still no issue for us.
This whole thread is why I believe we should only use the certificate number on the map, and not name courses. We are trying to have two unique identifiers, but the name can change. Only the cert number is really static.
This makes sense to me, Duane. I recently was contacted by two small charities who wanted to conduct 5Ks in the same park where there is no measured course - one in the spring, one in the fall. Since each individually clutched their respective chests when I told them certification and a good-quality map costs $450.00, I put them together and they agreed to share the investment.
One race is in April. The other one is in November. Each client is paying half of the fee, and each client will get her own map with her respective race name. Of course, each map will bear the same certification number - unless I am going out of bounds here.
The map I submit for certification would have no race name on it unless you, Gene, or someone else in authority tells me I must. If so, I will just put the park name on it. The clients don't care. Each has her map with her own charity's name up top.
I would be interested to see the statistics for race searches. As a measurer, I usually search by city and distance, or state and distance, not by race name. Does anyone have an idea how most people search for maps? By name?
One race is in April. The other one is in November. Each client is paying half of the fee, and each client will get her own map with her respective race name. Of course, each map will bear the same certification number - unless I am going out of bounds here.
The map I submit for certification would have no race name on it unless you, Gene, or someone else in authority tells me I must. If so, I will just put the park name on it. The clients don't care. Each has her map with her own charity's name up top.
I would be interested to see the statistics for race searches. As a measurer, I usually search by city and distance, or state and distance, not by race name. Does anyone have an idea how most people search for maps? By name?
Thanks, Neal.
quote:Originally posted by Mark Neal:
I moved Lyman's new question to this new thread.
Lyman,
Do what you want! However if one searches for the race by name, good luck as the race name that's on the certificate is the one that's entered.
I still suggest to submit to the regional certifier the data and ask for two certificates with the names of each. I would ask him for a reduce rate for the 2nd to cover his cost of the registration. This way one that does a search by name their race will show.
I feel Duane, you and others have a conflict interest as this will not happen with 99% of those that measure.
Do what you want! However if one searches for the race by name, good luck as the race name that's on the certificate is the one that's entered.
I still suggest to submit to the regional certifier the data and ask for two certificates with the names of each. I would ask him for a reduce rate for the 2nd to cover his cost of the registration. This way one that does a search by name their race will show.
I feel Duane, you and others have a conflict interest as this will not happen with 99% of those that measure.
Let me put my 2 cents into the pot. As both a measurer and a runner. First as a measurer I know to look a course up by the certification number but even when a race is certified they do not put the number on their race info. So as a runner I will either look a race up by the race name or if I can not find it that way by the city and state.
I think you need to determine who the web site is for the most runners, measurers or others and make the decision from that because I would say most runners are going to search by race name.
I think you need to determine who the web site is for the most runners, measurers or others and make the decision from that because I would say most runners are going to search by race name.
Lyman,
I bet if you had told them if they pay $5 more, people who use their race name in a search on the USATF certification site would actually find their race, they would have said okay.
I bet if you had told them if they pay $5 more, people who use their race name in a search on the USATF certification site would actually find their race, they would have said okay.
Let's face it a race name is a good identifier.
Why would anyone takeaway the system we have and change it. Yes discussion is good, but Duane should come to his senses.
Why would anyone takeaway the system we have and change it. Yes discussion is good, but Duane should come to his senses.
Gene, I don't see where this topic is a conflict of interest. Changing the policy won't make anyone any more money, so that isn't a factor. It would save people money in the long run.
Going with what J.A. has said, using a race name is a good way to find a course, if they never change their course. If a course is changed, then we have Joe's 2010, Joe's 2011, etc. If we name a course for the area (City Park 5k) because many events use it, then none of the events are matched in our current system. So, to me, the system is not as good as it could be.
If we only put the cert number on the map, we could match events with the same cert number, and all events using that cert number would show in a search, and the race name search would return the correct course, or all the courses they have had certified for their event. A more complete result of the search.
No, I will never come to my senses regarding using a hobbled system, when a more-robust system could be created.
Besides, there is no other active discussion on the Forum, and it is snowing, so I have nothing better to do.
Going with what J.A. has said, using a race name is a good way to find a course, if they never change their course. If a course is changed, then we have Joe's 2010, Joe's 2011, etc. If we name a course for the area (City Park 5k) because many events use it, then none of the events are matched in our current system. So, to me, the system is not as good as it could be.
If we only put the cert number on the map, we could match events with the same cert number, and all events using that cert number would show in a search, and the race name search would return the correct course, or all the courses they have had certified for their event. A more complete result of the search.
No, I will never come to my senses regarding using a hobbled system, when a more-robust system could be created.
Besides, there is no other active discussion on the Forum, and it is snowing, so I have nothing better to do.
I've had two situations in recent years like the one Lyman describes in his February 13 post.
In both cases, two organizations wanted to use the course for an event- one in the spring, the other in the fall, both in the same direction.
In the first case, I measured the course and drew two identical maps, one with the name of one of the events, one with the name of the other. They received separate certification numbers. I charged them one standard measurement fee (including certification), and a second certification fee.
In the other case, the two organizations agreed on a generic name for the course, and I used it. One certificate, one fee.
Either works, and I don't see any reason to impose a "one size fits all" policy. I do think, however, that we shouldn't discourage the use of race names on certificates- simply because courses are most widely known by the names of the events that are contested over them, and someone searching the site for the map of a course for a particular event shouldn't have to try to figure out the generic course name.
In both cases, two organizations wanted to use the course for an event- one in the spring, the other in the fall, both in the same direction.
In the first case, I measured the course and drew two identical maps, one with the name of one of the events, one with the name of the other. They received separate certification numbers. I charged them one standard measurement fee (including certification), and a second certification fee.
In the other case, the two organizations agreed on a generic name for the course, and I used it. One certificate, one fee.
Either works, and I don't see any reason to impose a "one size fits all" policy. I do think, however, that we shouldn't discourage the use of race names on certificates- simply because courses are most widely known by the names of the events that are contested over them, and someone searching the site for the map of a course for a particular event shouldn't have to try to figure out the generic course name.
Jay,
"someone searching the site for the map of a course for a particular event shouldn't have to try to figure out the generic course name"
I agree. That is what got me thinking about taking the name off of the course map on the USATF site, and only having the cert number. AND making our database do what a database should, and have a table with race names paired with the course ID. Then, when someone searched for an event name, all the courses associated with that event would show. That already happens. BUT, additionally, if someone had the cert number and did a search, every event that uses that course would show.
By having to submit a new cert for each event that wants a map to have their name on a course, we are creating unnecessary paperwork. I've gone over this many times, so I won't re-hash the inefficiency.
"someone searching the site for the map of a course for a particular event shouldn't have to try to figure out the generic course name"
I agree. That is what got me thinking about taking the name off of the course map on the USATF site, and only having the cert number. AND making our database do what a database should, and have a table with race names paired with the course ID. Then, when someone searched for an event name, all the courses associated with that event would show. That already happens. BUT, additionally, if someone had the cert number and did a search, every event that uses that course would show.
By having to submit a new cert for each event that wants a map to have their name on a course, we are creating unnecessary paperwork. I've gone over this many times, so I won't re-hash the inefficiency.
quote:Originally posted by Mark Neal:
Lyman,
I bet if you had told them if they pay $5 more, people who use their race name in a search on the USATF certification site would actually find their race, they would have said okay.
I understand your point, Mark. Here is how it seems to usually go in these parts (MD-DC-NoVA area): my race clients get a PDF of their certified course map and of their certificate. They post the map on their race web site. Race registrants use this map. Only rarely do I hear of someone using the USATF site. When they do, it seems clear to me that only a handful of users know how to research courses in their area. This despite how easy it is on USATF.org. I end up doing the search for them.
Maybe the search site is used more than I think - Bob might be able to fill me in. I know I am grateful for it. I think it is still, unfortunately, a "well-kept-secret" in the D.C. area running world.