Do away with course names

Duane, I've always tried to used a geographical name rather than an event.

Your idea has some merit, but until race directors begin consistently putting the cert # on their entry materials, I think the average runner will have some difficulty finding the map online. (I think the majority of races put "USATF Certified Course" and leave it at that).

Just my initial .02. I'll cogitate on this more while I'm out doing my second Nemo-induced bout of shoveling in a while.

I think you are asking for two things:

1) Allowing two entries in the database, with two different race names, to point to the same certification map.

2) A requirement that race names are not allowed on certification maps.

I don't see a big issue with #1 as far as policy goes (although it would require a change to the database).

My big issue with #2 is that it makes it easy for a race to use a course that another race paid to have certified. And the race can do that in a way that is completely transparent to the their runners and everyone else. All they would have to do is state on their website that the course is certified and then provide a link directly to the map. That way the runners would never see the entry in the database that shows another race's name. They can do the same thing now, but when the runners bring up the map it will have another race's name on it.

Jim - the db would be redesigned to continue to allow searching for a race name - the one that caused the course to be certified, primarily.

This also somewhat addresses Mark's concern about "ownership". Unless a new race goes through us (via a process to be created), their event won't show in the USATF db search. But, Mark, even if the 'bandit' event links to the map, the cert with the original event's name on it will appear. Not completely transparent for courses since 2008.

We already have a policy on changing a race name. So you want to do away with that policy and start another.

How many Race directors even know the Certification Number? I assume not many, but they know the race name!

Here is the present Policy.
USATF Course Certification - Policy on Changing Name of a Certified Course

Name Change requests for a Certified Course (adopted Jan 20, 2009)

There are three situations to address.

1.The original race asks for a name change and a new Certificate.
2.A new group secures written permission from the old group to change the course name and have their own Certificate.
3.Another group wants to use this course and request their own Certificate.
For #1 & #2 they will follow this procedure

They should produce the original Certificate (with the map on back) and resubmit a new map with their name (the course ID Number should be removed) to the Regional Certifier along with a $10 fee. Then the Regional Certifier will issue a new Certificate ID Number that will start with the year the original course was certified followed by a 9. Example: the original ID# was AZ06001GAN, hence the new ID# would be AZ06901GAN. The new certificate would be submitted to the Vice Chair with the normal fee. The old course would not be taken off the list of Certified Courses, but the new course would now be listed.

For #3 they will follow this procedure

It must be remeasured and follow the normal protocol. The old course will remain on the list!

However, the RRTC encourages generic names for courses and discourages changing those names. Please note that anyone can use another’s Certified Course as all the RRTC did was to Certify the course.

Duane,
Yes, I forgot that the certificate comes up as the second page when you link to a map. So a bandit could not go completely undetected.

Gene,

I am not asking if we should change the policy for re-naming courses. I would like to do away with names for courses.

Many events change their course, or at least tweak it, every year, so we have Joe's 5k, Joe's 5k 2011, Joe's 5k 2012, etc. Plus, we have the Houston Marathon Half-marathon, the Houston Marathon 5k, and the Houston Marathon (just using Houston as a generic name).

If we only use the cert number, we won't have the convoluted names on our courses, just unique numbers. The events can be paired with the cert in our db, so it would still be searchable by event name. Which, due to our naming of courses for geographic area, makes it hard to find an event.

For instance, I am going to send in a cert tomorrow for Sierra's Race 5k. The course will be named "The Ranch 5k", after the location of the course. When posted, if someone looks for "Sierra's Race 5k" in Loveland, Colorado, they won't find it. They will look up all 5k courses in Loveland, and won't find Sierra's Race 5k. Seems like it would be more advantageous to make the changes I have suggested, so it would be easy for runners to find all the courses that a particular event has certified, instead of hoping they know the name of the course. Just a thought.

I'm going to ask a few race directors about this. Not that they should be the deciding group, but if making the change Duane proposes makes them LESS likely to publicize the course cert, or worse, not certify their course(s) at all, then it's not a good thing.
Although we might see ourselves as arbiters of course certification procedure, we should remember that we are essentially providers of a service to race organizers, and should strive to be as "consumer friendly" as possible.
If a timing company decided "It's too much trouble to keep track of all the individual runners' names - we're just going to give them an ID # and use that for registration, results, etc." I doubt they'd get much repeat business.
This is, however, good food for thought during the winter season when measurements are slow to non-existent in these parts (unless you're Dave Katz).

Jim, if we change the db to match event names with course numbers, this would be more user-friendly. We would have one cert number for the course. If an event changed its name, all they would have to do is notify the measurer>certifier>VC>registrar (same chain as now), and we could update the db. A very simple change, and no new paperwork is added. Then, when someone searched for the event name, it would return the cert number(s). As it is now, as I explained above with the Sierra's Race, people can't find an event map if we named the course geographically.

What I see is that we are not really user-friendly now; requiring a new cert when an event changes names (if they want the map to reflect that change), and, difficulty in finding a match when we name the course geographically. How are either of those scenarios user-friendly?

Keep course names, add race names

It is not really my place to express a view in this debate about the US system. However it has come up before, probably more than once. A search of my posts took me to this post which I made in the 2006 thread on the usability of course names.

In the UK we have in our database records two separate fields: one for course names (generally somewhat geographical and given by the measurer subject to modification by the certifier if he sees fit), and one for race names (given by the race director and usually corresponding to what he has used for advertising and for the race licence/permit).

We also have a facility for annual renewal so the race name can change each year as sponsors come and go. The course name remains fixed. We can also accommodate different races on the same course.

If the measurement paperwork comes in with only a course name then this is copied into the race name field.

All course measurements also have a unique serial number which includes the year digits.

The name on the map is suppose to be the same as the name on the certificate. I thought we decided this two years ago. However, it has not been followed. To me this would solve the problem when doing a search.

I am confused by what Duane wants for us to do. Who cares if a race wants to change the name. Just follow the policy and it's done.

I've certified courses in NH that the race director uses for multiple races and each race has a different race name. However, the course name doesn't change. The race director uses the map for advertising and wanted to show a map for each race with the "race name."

So, I simply provided multiple maps for that purpose, one for each course. Each map showed a different race name near the top and the course name, parenthetically, beneath the required certificate number. The actual certificate, held by the race director, shows only the course name.

Duane, Isn't the example for tweaking a course from year to year (Joe's 5K, Joe's 5K 2011, etc.) really a change to an existing course that should be re-certified?

Duane seems to be advocating for changes that benefit the certifiers or casual database users or lurkers much more than the customers who ordered and paid for the measurement and map. The existing rules, quoted by Gene seem adequate for naming and re-naming courses to suit races. Mike's method of 2 name fields in the course database might be a good addition.

I can verify that in my experience, I've never encountered a race director who would want to pay for a measurement of a course named after something other than his/her race.

Mike's (UK's) system is similar to what I am proposing. The course name is separate from the race name. This way, as he states, the race name can change annually to accommodate new sponsors. The course name does not change, but the new race name is shown as using the same course as the previous year. This is basically what I am suggesting. Instead of using course names, though, just use cert numbers.

What Ron is doing is also along the lines of what I am proposing. But, when he refers to the course name and cert number, under the race name, the course name would disappear, and just the cert number would be under the race name. Why have two identifiers for one course (course name and cert number), when one will suffice?

Guido Bros, what I am proposing is due to the ones who pay for the course certification changing event names. When they change the name of their event, since we have named the course after their event, they have to pay for a new cert. Granted, it is only $10, or so, but we issue a new cert for the same course with a new name on it. Next year, they get another title sponsor, and pay for the name change again. If they only used the cert number, and the map didn't have a name for the course, there would be no need to pay for a new cert. If they want the name of their event on the map, as in Ron's case, that' fine. "Joe's 5k, using USATF certified course #MN13001RR". No ambiguity, and no new cert number into the database.

Think of our cert name and cert number as a house address. My house address is not "Russells, 1484 E Easter Cir". My house address is "1484 E Easter Cir". When I move, the house address is still "1484 E Easter Cir". The occupant changes, but not the house address. The USPS db gets updated to the new occupant who is now living at that address. The cert number is the course "address". We don't need a name for the course, also.

Taking it back to database design, each record has a unique identifier. Our cert numbers are unique identifiers for our courses. Why are we not using that, instead of a name? Names are not unique. We had a discussion about all the "Turkey Trot" courses. Obviously, not unique. But, each of their certificate numbers is unique. It is much easier to pull up all courses associated with an event if we keep event names and course numbers separate in the db. We wouldn't need to add year numbers to event names, as in the example above.

Our system was conceived when there were few certified courses. We are adding more courses each year. It is time to update our database design to accommodate events changing their names, and not having to issue a new cert for the same course every time.

Duane,

There still is bookkeeping to be done. Again, I see what we have been doing is working.

Very few identify a course by a certification number. If one does a search with a race name that's the same one as the map(which should be done) and the city of the race, it would be found. Let's make sure the race name is the same on the map and certificate. That's my proposal!!!!!!


I understand that this group has a different sponsor, so they get the same cert number. Again, no matter you created work for someone and who does it make it easier for? Certainly not the running community or the Vice Chairs/Certifiers/Registrar.

So we're okay with a race pasting their race name on the top of a certification map and putting it on their website?!?

While the course name on the cert is the same as on the map, this is not necessarily the event name. We are encouraging measurers to name the course geographically - City Park 5k, or Event Center 5k, or something like that. The race name may be Joe's Charity 5k. The certificate and map say "City Park 5k", so in the db will show the course as City Park 5k. This does not help a runner find the course that Joe's Charity 5k is using, as "Joe's Charity 5k" doesn't show up anywhere in our database.

Even looking for all the 5k courses in the city won't show Joe's Charity 5k. The event has to advertise the USATF certificate number for a runner to find the course they are using.

I agree with Gene. From my view point, we would be trying to fix something that isn’t broken. Most of my requests for course information reference the race name. Sometimes that is geographic, Monte Sano 5K, sometimes not, Rudolph Run. I have rarely received an official request for a name change. And the change process is not cumbersome.

Most names on a certificate aren't generic. They are the sponsors name. As examples: Boston Marathon, Big Sur, Falmouth, Marine Corps Marathon, ect. What do you want to call these?


I'm done making comments as our views differ and that's ok.

Actually most of those are more locale than sponsor specific.
For instance Falmouth - it's had a bunch of sponsors over the past decade. New Balance is the current one, and is signed on for 5 years, but that could change before the life of the cert expires.
Having certified that course, I omitted any sponsor name in the title. Most runners don't use it anyhow. Jay Wight might chime in that the Bank of America definitely wants its name on the Chicago Marathon cert, but generally most don't care. However, most races DO want the event name. I'm not saying Duane's not right, but in 20+ years of measuring I can't recall a single instance of having to rename a course.

The discussion of course names on the certificate has been on going for years to my knowledge. In all my course measurement which is now probably around 500 I have only had two requests for renaming a course and one of those was for the race director to rename the course he originally paid for measurement to honor a fallen police officer. My point is that in my area it is not a common issue.
I am seeing more race directors using courses that they did not pay to have measured to the point of waiting until another RD bites the bullet and then coming in weeks or months later to use a course. Courses are public domain but I think the RD who pays for the measurement is entitled to advertise his/her race on the course certificate. We are providing a service and many RDs use the certified course map on their websites. They consider the name part of the service. There are times in a park setting when only one course is permitted or when the RD does not have a preference I will use the generic area name. There are some advantages to a generic location name but the value of naming a course is usually very important to the RD. If an RD finds value in having a course certified with a race name, then they will pay for the service. A certified course is a great service (and in many cases even an expectation) for a runner. When a course is certified everyone wins. Let's continue to encourage RDs to have their courses certified. As John DeHaye said earlier why fix something that isn't broken.

JHP, we don't need names on the certificate map. The map is posted with the certificate, and the cert has the event's name on it. The map (in my opinion) should only have the course number on it, as we are certifying the course, not the event.

If a measurer wants to put the event name on a map, they would be free to do so. The certified map on the USATF site would not have a name, only a number.

Have you not had an event change its course? Now you have two "Joe's 5k" courses in the db. Same event, different course. If we only used course numbers, Joe's would advertise the cert number of the course they were going to use each year. No confusion.

We have sponsors change each year for some events. I think it is ridiculous to charge for a new cert for a name change every year. If we only put cert numbers on the map, they would only contact me for a quick name change on a map I would send to them, not a change on the USATF site. Much simpler that way.

Duane

It may be simpler in your view, but I feel as others this is not the way to go. Races want their own identity!

We have beat this to death. As others have said, why fix something that's not broken.

I agree that most don't want a change. I do feel there is value in evaluating our processes periodically, though.

The cell phone was not broken, but it now does much more than it used to, because people asked "how can we make this better?". Most of us didn't think about how a cell phone could be better, but we are now glad that someone thought about it.

Just saying, we should not keep doing what we have always done, without asking if we could improve a process (not just map names).

quote:

As others have said, why fix something that's not broken.

That was Kodak's tagline, wasn't it?

Just kidding, but I do think we should always be on the lookout for better ways to do things, even if the current way isn't "broken."

Just today, I noticed that a Running Store I work with had taken a certification map from USATF and covered over the original race name. In its place it had put its own race name. In this particular instance, naming this race the "Anytown 5K" for instance, would have been worthless. There are no less than 5 active certified 5K courses within a stone's throw of each other here in this "Anytown". Clearly, the cert # is the distinguishing difference in all these courses.

I personally see no issue with changing the name on maps of active certified courses. I just wish they would ask me to do the change, so their certification map does not look like an unprofessional piece of trash on their race web site.

I am all for improvements but in this case there seem to be as many reasons for keeping a race name as converting to location name. In many cases there are multiple courses of the same distance in some towns. Anytown 5K A, Anytown 5k B, etc. is not very meaningful to a runner trying to find a course for the race he/she is running.
Joe's race 2010, Joe's race 2012 for course changes for a specific race is meaningful.
A cert number on a map without a name could be confusing. Most runners never see the cert, only the map. The name is helpful.
At this point in time I don't think the "benefits" associated with the change merit the change. Based on the conversations on both sides, the issue is does this change really provide benefit to our customers (race directors and runners). It is not clear that it does.

Jane

Race directors can and will change the names on our maps. We cannot control this. In my opinion, naming the race after its location makes a lot of sense. I just measured a 5K in Ashburn, VA, where there are 12 active and 10 expired certified courses. Most have some roads in common. Instead of naming this most recent course by the organizers name "One Sparrow Running Home For Haiti 5K", it would be simpler to just call it the "Capital Community Church 5K" since this event starts and finises on church property. To this I would add "14300 Ashburn Village Blvd, Ashburn, VA 20147" to the title. Now it is clear to anyone looking up this map exactly where this race is located. Or, how about naming it the "14300 Ashburn Village 5K 2013"?

When the Action Conference For Veeblefester Re-invigoration comes along and wants to use the same course, and the church permits it, they can either leave the map name as is, or change it to the "Veeblefester 5K" for their own purposes, right? Should we care that they do this?

Lyman, you are talking about two different concepts in your last post.

First, naming of courses on the map. IF we set up the USATF database to allow many event names to point to the same cert map (that ONLY contains the course number), then someone would enter the event name in the search box, and the proper course, or list of courses, would appear.

Second point, though, touches on "course ownership". Ignoring that no one owns a course, although many have posted in this thread that those who pay for certification feel they own the certificate, if another event, or even the same event changed their name, we would simply enter a new "Event Name - Certificate Number" pairing in a properly-designed database, and the map and event would be returned in a search. The old pairing would still be available, but no new map would have to be generated. The same nameless map would show for every event name that uses the course.

Again, course ownership is not addressed in this scenario, but it is not adequately addressed in our policy now. Submitting a new set of the same measurement paperwork for a new cert for the new event just creates a new cert using the same map, this time with a new name on the map. Who owns the course? Why would the measurer re-measure for the new event, if they had already measured the course, and it is unchanged?

I think we do address ownership.

A new certificate is not issued unless permission is given by the original race. An RD can paste over the original race name on a certificate with his own race name without getting permission, but it's pretty clear to him and everyone else that he's not supposed to do that.

It's not so clear to him or anyone else that pasting his race name on the top of certification map with no name on it is something he's not supposed to do unless he has permission.

I have a different take on "ownership".

A new certificate is issued with whatever name is on the cert and map, upon submission of the measurement data by the measurer. I can measure a course for Joe's 5k, then submit the paperwork. I can then submit the same paperwork with a different race name, race contact info, and race date for a different event. I get a cert for the same course, different event and race contact. I can charge the new event full-price, if I want, or just a small fee to cover my minimal time plus the certification fee. Who "owns" that course? Same course, different numbers. Original event doesn't have to give permission.

If the original event changes its name, I can send in a change request to my certifier, with a new map and fees. New cert number, same expiration year. Old cert still shows on our site, since the course can still be used.

While we would like to think that race directors respect someone else having a course measured, it is not always the case. There are some postings on this forum about race directors "pirating" someone else's course (again, inferring ownership of a course).

Maybe we should discuss the concept of ownership of a cert number, instead of a course. I would own the cert number for a course I paid to have measured. I can use that cert number in my advertising. You, on the other hand, would not be allowed to use the same cert number in your advertising for your event run on the same course. I don't think this is feasible, but it may address what someone could "own" with regard to certified courses.

What about a course that is modified, and a new cert is issued? The old course is still a useable course, but the event moved the Start or Finish for their convenience. Can another use the old course without offending anyone? The original event abandoned the original course as certified, so who does it "belong" to?

These are only some of the gray areas when we say someone "owns" a course, just because they paid to have it certified. I agree, it seems like someone could claim ownership, but when the courses are on public property, the public has access to those courses. If they pay the public-use fees (park permits, etc), there is no reason they can be excluded from using the same course.

To me, this begs the question of whether a particular event should be in the public domain. Say, for instance, we charge an "exclusivity" premium for a client who pays for a certification. Would we be willing to keep that certification hidden on the search site? Any other race could just get a copy of the course map from the race web site, conduct a race on this USATF certified course and put their own name on it, anyway. They would be able to advertise "certified course" on their marketing materials.

I do not understand the concept of "pirating". We put the course maps out there. I always assumed they are there for public use. In the D.C. area, lots of races use a course whose certification was paid for by some other event. They just print the map, change the name, and scan it. Should we care, or is this actually a good thing because more events are thus conducted on certified courses instead of odometer measured courses (there are lots of them around in my part of the country)?