Course Detours & USATF rules

Boston would have to be contacted and maybe they could make some adjusted times. However, did anyone from the race actually get an exact time of the delay. As for you do anything, I don't understand what that could be as I assume they ran the certified course. I know this has happened before, but don't recall the out come.

USATF and the RRTC can't do anything here.

Gene,

They're working with Boston and trying to get time adjustments put into place. That's out of my hands.

I'm looking at ways to face the challenge for future events. Runners are going to demand a better solution from the event other than "assurance that the train will not hinder them".

Good luck with that as there are so many situation that can occur. Nathan, yes you should point out potential problems with a course you measure and certify. Such as: turns to close to the start or finish, traffic, poor running surface, turn arounds in a very narrow street, ect.

I recall a race in NJ that had 10,000 runners. The race started and all a sudden the police, FBI and Secret Service showed up at the finish and said the president was about to arrive. "You must clear the area". I don't recall what actually happened.

They said you must stop the race. Now as you see it is impossible to cover all situations.

Thanks Gene.

The heart of my question is: If I certify a 2nd route that deviates from the original and rejoins it at a later point where the distance ran will be the same (allowing the finish to remain the same for both courses) is there any problem with either course time qualifying as a valid BQ time?

Also, do you know of any USATF rules regarding this as it would apply to an overall or division winner. Since runners could conceivably run two different courses during the same event, there could be some disputes over placement.

I have run into less serious but similar problems with buses not getting the word about street closures. The way I (think) I have solved this is to keep digging with the authorities until I get an actual name and cell phone number of the bus dispatcher or duty officer who is scheduled to be on the job while the race is in progress. I have a conversation in advance of race day about the fact that any change to the modified bus schedule for race day could create a problem. I ask for reassurances that the buses will stay away from the course, and I get them. I email them a course map with the times. Then, I call early race morning to confirm. Before I did this, the drivers never got the word despite we had a permit with all the local authorities in which all affected parties were dutifully notified. The buses reliably tried to drive onto the course until they were stopped by police before I took these steps.

To my way of thinking, either the train company agrees to not cross the race route or they don't. I feel it is not necessarily the train company's fault if they promise to stay away and then show up anyway. The reason is that it is the RD's job to do everything short of parking cars on the tracks downstream to ensure the train folks fulfill their promise. I have learned that taking someone's word is rarely enough. For a rail crossing, the RD should insist on something in writing. If there must be some quid pro quo for such a written agreement, the race should pony up. If there is a written contract and a train still interrupts the race, the race then has the opportunity to sue for entry fee refunds and expenses.

IMO if the rail company refuses this kind of agreement, it means there is a good chance a train will cross during the race - at least this is what the RD should assume. In this case, the course should be redesigned. Apart from a Boston - like disaster, there is no excuse for a train going through the middle of a race. Full stop.

I'm sitting here wondering to myself, in the history of road racing has a train ever been stopped from going where it wanted to go because there was a road race in progress?

Every USATF Sanctioned road race is either a Championship or a Fun Run.
99% of the races are fun runs - even some of the largest races in the country.
A fun run can determine awards in any way, shape or form they want as long as the method is advertised in advance to the participants.
Having a course deviate to two separate routes would fall under this. And if you think about it, the NYC Marathon has slightly different routes for the first 8 miles. In regards to qualifying for Boston, the Olympic Trials or any other race the key to remember is that time has nothing to do with place in anyone race (except an IAAF Gold Label Marathon). Events that require qualification have the power to make exceptions.

Nathan if you are going to make an alternate route that, presumably, doesn't cross the tracks, why not just use that route instead and forget about the one that crosses the tracks?

quote:

Originally posted by Mark Neal:
I'm sitting here wondering to myself, in the history of road racing has a train ever been stopped from going where it wanted to go because there was a road race in progress?

Right. For this reason, I wouldn't design a course that crosses an at grade rail line. Too risky. I'm guessing that the other options for this particular course may be less desirable due to hills or other encumbrances.

Murphy and the Second Law of Thermodynamics are always in charge.

Mark,

My wife made the same suggestion. A valid one and I'll propose it but as Lyman suspected, the alternate would impact one of the hooks of the race in that it boasts a net drop in elevation. While the net drop would remain the same, the elevation profile of the course would show a sharp incline for the alternate course.

This would be another reason for potential trouble if two finishers were disputing placement if they ran different courses. One is markedly more difficult than the other.

Yes on what David wrote. I've even competed in or coached in races where there was a course option. As long as the race lets the competitors know in advance there is an option I think that's a cool race idea. The race I did was an XC ski race where you could choose to take a straighter path that went up and down a big hill or you could take a slightly longer path that avoided the hill. Most of the field took the slightly longer path.

And to Mark regarding has a train ever been stopped from going where it wanted to go by a race... In the early days of the marathon I work for our Course Director parked his truck across the tracks after a train that we were assured would not be operating during the race started crossing our course to attached cars. The train was crossing onto the course then moving off, so during one of the gaps he moved his truck in. The RR was not pleased, but we had the paperwork to back up our actions and they didn't push things.

Wow that's a dedicated race director!

And nervy!

There have been several races disrupted by trains, one in Ashland, VA (I think a 10K?), and others elsewhere.

I remember a marathon in DC where car traffic did not get stopped as promised. Eager runners were making idiotic dashes in between cars, not a pretty picture. This was a long time ago-- does not happen any more.

http://www.columbian.com/news/...due-to-short-course/

Boston Marathon rejects Vancouver qualifiers due to short course - Error led to Vancouver USA Marathon being 1,126 feet short

By Micah Rice, Columbian Sports Editor
Published: September 28, 2016, 11:39 AM

Three months after crossing the finish line, excitement has turned to frustration for some Vancouver USA Marathon runners.

Runners who thought they had qualified for the 2017 Boston Marathon are being told their Vancouver times won’t count.

That’s because of an error that left the course 1,126 feet shorter than the standard marathon distance of 26.2 miles.

To gain entry to the Boston Marathon, runners must achieve a qualifying time based on their age and gender. Typically, anywhere from 20 to 30 Clark County runners participate in the world-famous race each April.

Kristen Morin, 45, of Brush Prairie finished the Vancouver USA Marathon on June 19 in 3 hours, 46 minutes and 28 seconds. That was faster than the Boston qualifying standard of 3:55 for her age.

She applied to run her third consecutive Boston Marathon when registration opened earlier this month.

Tuesday, Morin was notified by the Boston Marathon that her entry would not be accepted due to the Vancouver course being short.
That left Morin with no recourse. She hadn’t run another marathon below the qualifying time during the one-year window that ended on Sept. 18.

“You have a goal in mind, and then to have it shot down is very frustrating,” Morin said.
Vancouver USA Marathon race director Brian Davis says he empathizes with runners. He said some have demanded refunds because they can’t say they ran a full marathon, a bucket-list achievement for some.

“I get it; people are frustrated,” said Davis, who said the marathon is unable to offer refunds. “Many of them trained six months for this. We care about our runners. I want to make that clear.”

The course error occurred at Frenchman’s Bar Regional Park, about 7½ miles into the race.
After starting in downtown Vancouver, the course heads northwest to Frenchman’s Bar before turning back. This year, runners turned around short of where they had in the race’s five previous years.

In past years, runners ran a loop around the entire parking lot at Frenchman’s Bar. This year, a misplaced course marker directed runners onto a path that cut that loop short.
Davis said carelessness was to blame for the error and the failure to detect it before the race. Because the race was run largely on city streets, he said his team had a short window to set up the course and wasn’t able to gauge the entire distance with measuring tools such as a handwheel.

He said race organizers will be extra diligent, including additional distance measurements, to make sure such errors don’t happen in the future.

Davis learned of the course error from runners who said their GPS trackers showed they had covered less than 26.2 miles.

Davis notified Vancouver USA Marathon runners of the error in an email sent on July 2. On July 22, he emailed Boston Marathon race director Dave McGillivray and other Boston officials to explain the error.

In past years, the Boston Marathon has accommodated runners whose qualifying times came on courses deemed too short. Times can be adjusted by using a runner’s pace during the race.

Davis submitted adjusted Vancouver times to Boston organizers on Aug. 7. Yet, he was notified earlier this month that Boston would not accept qualifying times from Vancouver.
“They said they had to draw a line in the sand,” Davis said.

Of the 459 runners who finished the Vancouver USA Marathon, Davis said 19 sought to use that race to gain entry into the Boston Marathon. It’s unknown how many had achieved Boston qualifying times at other marathons in the past year.

“Our team feels terrible,” Davis said. “We were very upfront with this, both with our runners and with (Boston race organizers).”