Road Running Technical Council MinutesUSATF Annual MeetingJacksonville, FL – December 3, 2005Attending: Bob Baumel, Norm Brand, Gary Corbitt, Mark Driscoll, Jim Estes, Fred Finke, Norm Green, David Katz, Justin Kuo, Glenn Latimer, Don Lein, Barb Leininger, Pat Leone, A.C. Linnerud, Kevin P. Lucas, Gene Newman, Ron Pate, George Regan, Pete Riegel, Tom Riegel, Don Shepan, Phil Stewart, Gary Westerfield, Mike Wickiser.
The meeting was called to order at 08:37 by RRTC Chairman Mike Wickiser. All present introduced themselves. We were happy to welcome two second-generation members of our course measuring family: Gary Corbitt, the son of course measurement pioneer Ted Corbitt who started the course certification program back in the 1960s, and Tom Riegel, son of Pete Riegel who served as RRTC Chairman for 15 years and remains very involved in course measurement.
Officers’ ReportsChairman, Mike Wickiser: Several new certifiers were appointed during the past year:
Justin Kuo is now the certifier for Connecticut and Massachusetts.
Matthew Studholme is the new certifier for Hawaii, Kentucky, North & South Dakota and West Virginia. In addition,
Neville Wood has been appointed Validations Chair, as the previous holder of this position, Paul Hronjak, had been overwhelmed by work duties and was unable to spend the time needed for overseeing the validations program. Paul remains the RRTC Vice-Chairman East.
During this year, Mike also conducted a pre-race validation measurement for the Papa John’s 10 mile course, and a post-race validation for the LaSalle Bank Shamrock Shuffle.
Course Registrar, Mike Wickiser: So far this year, 1232 new courses have been certified, as compared with 889 reported at the time of last year’s RRTC meeting (which is really just about the same rate, considering that last year’s RRTC meeting was held about 3 months before the USATF Convention). Overall, we have 11,307 courses in the “Active” list and 16,067 in the “Archive” list, for a total of 27,376 certified courses. 5 km is, by far, the most popular race distance, comprising 64% of new certifications in 2005. Historically, 5 km courses comprise about 41% of the overall course list.
Validations Chairman, Neville Wood (report submitted by Mike Wickiser): Paul Hronjak’s lack of time for managing the program resulted in a backlog of courses needing validation. As of this meeting, 7 courses were scheduled to be remeasured in December 2005 in order to get back on schedule. Among other validation activity during the past year, records set on 6 courses were approved without requiring remeasurement, and records set on 9 courses were approved based on previous validations. Mike Wickiser’s remeasurement of the LaSalle Bank Shamrock Shuffle 8 km was, at this time, the only remeasurement performed so far in 2005.
In discussion, David Katz asked if we may need to perform validations for IAAF records in addition to USATF records, as IAAF has established road running records with a validation requirement. Comments were made regarding differences between IAAF and USATF standards involving drop/separation/wind requirements and allowance for error in validation measurements.
Vice-Chairman West, Gene Newman: A workshop in Salt Lake City in November 2004 was conducted by Gene along with Mike Wickiser and Dave Poppers. In addition to measurement instruction, this workshop presented information on various topics relating to RRTC and course certification. For example, it was explained that a course measurer also needs to prepare all of the paperwork and, most importantly, the course map.
An interesting situation occurred in the State of Washington, where some e-mails were flying back and forth questioning who the State certifier was (in fact, the Washington certifier is Bob Langenbach), and there seemed to be a feeling that RRTC is a “Good Old Boys Club” where nobody else could become a certifier. After Bob Langenbach informed Gene about this situation, Gene addressed the problem with an e-mail explaining how he (Gene) was appointed among other things. Thus, the problem has been solved; however, Gene suggests doing a workshop in Washington this spring or summer.
Webmaster, Bob Baumel: As reported at last year’s RRTC meeting in Stamford, current USATF policy requires that the RRTC website, which has resided at
www.rrtc.net, be incorporated into the central USATF site at
www.usatf.org. USATF webmaster Keith Lively started this process in Spring 2004 by copying some of our material himself from rrtc.net to a Course Certification section in usatf.org. However, it was made clear that RRTC would have control over porting the remaining RRTC content to usatf.org. Consequently, Bob was given privileges to update and maintain two areas on the USATF site: a portion of the Course Certification section (not including the Search Engine) and the RRTC Committee area. During 2005, Bob ported nearly all remaining content from rrtc.net to usatf.org. Once this process was sufficiently complete (late August 2005), Bob reconfigured rrtc.net so the URL
www.rrtc.net “redirected” to the Certification area on usatf.org instead of displaying pages on rrtc.net itself.
Unfortunately, this caused some confusion. While nearly everything previously on rrtc.net (including downloadable text course lists, the “current” list of most recent certifications, a downloadable issue of
Measurement News, historical information on course measurement, links to
MNForum, even a link to the unfinished RRTC Finish Line manual) was now on usatf.org, finding it could be difficult, especially when people didn’t even know it still existed! To many users of rrtc.net, it seemed that rrtc.net had simply disappeared and much of its content had vanished with it. People who accessed rrtc.net were, at least, redirected to the
Course Certification section on usatf.org. People who started from the USATF home page often had difficulty finding the Course Certification info at all. And even when people found the Course Certification area on usatf.org, few were aware that RRTC maintains that portion of the USATF site. Overall, the net result seemed to have been a reduction in RRTC’s online presence.
To remedy these problems, at least in part, two actions were undertaken on December 2nd, the day before our RRTC meeting at this Convention. First, on that afternoon, Mike Wickiser and Bob phoned Keith Lively, the USATF webmaster, asking if he could add more links on the USATF site to make it easier to find the Course Certification area, and if he could modify the left-side menu within the Certification area to make it easier to find the new “Tools” page which contains much of the material ported from rrtc.net (note: Bob’s privileges to modify two areas of the USATF site do not include ability to change the left-side menus, so we must ask Keith for such changes). Keith did, in fact, overhaul this left-side menu during the afternoon of Dec 2.
The second action was performed that night: Working from the Internet connection in his hotel room, Bob reconfigured rrtc.net once more, so it no longer redirects to usatf.org. Instead, it now displays a revamped version of the old RRTC home page, where the links now point to the current locations on usatf.org where RRTC content has been ported. Thus,
www.rrtc.net is back, not as a stand-alone website, but as a handy list of links for finding information on Course Certification, most of which now resides on the USATF site.
Other BusinessDiscussion of Kevin Lucas’ proposed bylaws amendment (discussion led by
Fred Finke, chair of USATF’s Long Distance Running Division): Prior to this RRTC meeting, it had already been decided to table Kevin’s amendment for next year. However, Fred led a discussion on this topic in order to hear comments from attendees at the RRTC meeting.
Some background: The amendment proposed by Kevin, with backing from George Regan and others, would massively restructure the USATF Course Certification program. Whereas the program is currently implemented directly by RRTC through a network of centrally appointed State Certifiers (independently from the USATF Association system), Kevin’s proposal would transfer the program to the individual USATF Associations, who would be “empowered to implement all aspects” of the Course Certification program with only “guidance, direction, and support” from RRTC. Additional controversial aspects of Kevin’s proposal:
• The Chair and Vice-Chairs of RRTC would become elected positions, to be nominated by each Association and selected by the Sports Committees and Associations Committee. (Currently, RRTC consists of a Chair and members named by the USATF President.)
• RRTC would, through each USATF Association, “adopt and implement a system to Grade and Certify road course certifiers and measurers.” (In our current system—basically, the system in effect since Ted Corbitt started the US Course Certification program in the early 1960s—measurers do not require special credentials but need only submit successful paperwork to “certifiers,” who are people with known technical proficiency. If “measurers” are to be graded and certified, the role of a “certifier” may change significantly; e.g., a “certifier” might be someone who certifies measurers instead of certifying courses!)
In initiating discussion on this proposal, Fred stated that RRTC is now “under the gun” due to perceptions that knowledge is too concentrated in a select group of individuals and needs to be broadened. Pete Riegel objected by pointing out that RRTC has published everything it knows about course measurement—on the web and in compilations of historical materials published on CDs (available to everyone via the web). Fred’s answer made it clear that by “knowledge,” he didn’t mean knowledge about course measurement, but rather the knowledge of which people are good measurers! (See additional discussion below about compiling lists of measurers.)
Several attendees, who were not themselves RRTC members or certifiers, expressed the opinion that Course Certification isn’t broken and that any perceived problems (which vary greatly from one region to another) can be addressed without turning the whole system upside down. Phil Stewart described RRTC as the “most open group” he knows, always welcoming new ideas and discussion and eager to recruit new people. Norm Green opined that the majority of runners are takers, not givers; only rare individuals are willing to contribute—and we mustn’t lose track of the word “Technical” in RRTC; we need a small, select group to manage this technical aspect of the sport.
It became clear during this discussion that RRTC had made a serious mistake by holding its own, separate meetings during the past two years (2003 in Akron and 2004 in Stamford) with only minimal presence at the USATF Conventions in those years. Quite possibly, this allowed growth of perceptions that RRTC is a closed group that ignores the rest of the sport, culminating this year in suggestions for major restructuring as embodied in Kevin’s proposal.
It’s implicit in Kevin’s proposal for grading measurers that lists of course measurers would be published. In fact, even before Kevin’s proposal, RRTC has, for some time, felt pressure from certain parties in USATF to produce lists of measurers. RRTC has, so far, resisted that pressure, claiming that such lists are unnecessary, as anyone who is looking for a measurer in a particular area can simply contact their State Certifier, who is the person best qualified to know who is measuring in the area. Now, the pressure to prepare lists of measurers has gotten stronger.
Pete Riegel pointed out that if lists of measurers are desired, it is very easy, using Excel, to manipulate the current RRTC course lists to extract lists of everyone who has measured in a specified time period (for example, the past 2 years), and such lists can also include the number of courses that each person measured during the specified period. Some attendees suggested the possibility of an algorithm translating the number of courses measured into a grade level (A, B, C, etc.), but there was no agreement whether such a scheme should be adopted. Also, it was noted that the number of courses measured isn’t necessarily an accurate indicator of how good the measurer is; there have been cases when someone measured a lot of courses but then had courses found short on validation!
Some attendees, especially George Regan who was a co-sponsor of Kevin’s amendment, expressed an urgent need to develop new measurers in their area, and felt that Kevin’s proposal could accomplish that goal by conducting measurement clinics. It was pointed out that any Association that wishes to conduct measurement clinics can do it now in the current system. There was also some debate on whether such clinics are really an effective way to develop new measurers, with people on both sides citing anecdotal evidence. Some pointed to clinics that produced one or more active measurers. Others claimed that, historically, few of the people who attend a clinic go on to measure any courses for certification—and considering the cost of putting on such clinics (securing a venue, obtaining bikes and Jones counters, etc.), they aren’t necessarily an efficient use of resources.
As stated at the beginning of this discussion, Kevin’s amendment has been tabled for next year. It is now up to Kevin to reformulate his proposal in a way that addresses the perceived problems and achieves a broad consensus instead of pitting groups against one another.
Selection of new RRTC Chairman and Course Registrar: Mike Wickiser, who currently holds both the RRTC Chairmanship and Course Registrar position, had announced prior to this meeting that he intends to step down from both positions.
To decide on the new RRTC Chairman, Fred Finke asked people to nominate candidates for presentation to USATF president Bill Roe, who would make the final decision (and Fred made it clear that he wanted more than one candidate!). Kevin Lucas nominated long-time measurer
David Katz, who is currently RRTC’s Finish Line Chairman. Mike Wickiser nominated
Gene Newman, currently the RRTC Vice-Chair West, who had already been contacted by Mike as a possible replacement before this meeting.
David and Gene both gave short speeches, in which each seemed willing to defer to the other in case the other person wanted the position more. David, in particular, noted that he (David) is well connected politically but not strong at tasks involving paperwork (writing reports, etc.).
David’s and Gene’s names were both given to Fred to pass on to Bill Roe. There were also indications by the end of our meeting that Fred and Bill might be looking for still more candidates. A decision on the new RRTC Chairman is expected by the end of 2005.
Choosing a new Course Registrar was easier. Prior to the meeting,
Stuart Riegel had already volunteered to take on the position, indicating that he has both the interest and time to do it. (Stu, who is one of Pete Riegel’s sons, wasn’t at this meeting, although Pete’s other son, Tom, did attend.) Everyone at the meeting was happy with this; therefore, Mike’s files will be transferred to Stu, who will become the new Course Registrar starting at the beginning of 2006.
Transition to Paperless Course Archives: To reduce the huge number of paper files kept by the Course Registrar, we intend to start converting those records to electronic instead of paper form. We expect all courses certified in 2006 to be kept this way and, at some point, we’ll also start converting the older files. This will require scanning both sides of the certificates (currently, only maps are scanned), saving them in a suitable format and backing them up on CDs. This will
not, however, change the way that Certifiers, or even the RRTC Vice-Chairs, do their work; they will continue preparing and passing on paper certificates as before.
Making this transition will require some choices involving file formats, image processing and data flow. Currently, Mike scans maps at 600 dpi in black & white, producing huge TIFF files, around 4 MB each, but these aren’t the files posted on the web. Mike sends those big TIFFs to USATF webmaster Keith Lively who reduces them to a pair of much smaller PNG files: a “viewable” version (about 100 dpi, 16-level grayscale) typically around 75 kB, and a “printable” version (300 dpi, black & white) around 100 kB. Keith then posts both of those PNGs on the USATF website.
The “printable” PNGs that Keith posts on the web are probably adequate to replace our paper copies of the maps. But how would this be implemented? Will Stu continue sending Keith the big raw TIFF files that Mike produces now (and then have Keith send back the printable PNGs)? Or will Stu do the reductions to PNG himself (and send Keith only the two little PNGs). Or would Stu scan each map twice: once to produce the big TIFF to send Keith and again to produce a smaller file in perhaps a 3rd format (e.g., JPEG) for his own archives? Remember also that Stu needs to scan
both sides of the certificate, while Keith has dealt with only the maps.
Given this transition, Kevin Lucas asked whether individual certifiers who have adequate computer equipment can start sending certificates and maps in electronic instead of paper form. The answer is “no.” It would make life more difficult for the Vice-Chairs and Course Registrar if they start receiving computer files in various formats and varying quality. Instead, for now, please continue sending paper. There is, however, one thing all certifiers can do to help: When copying maps onto certificates, make sure the map doesn’t run to the edge of the paper; instead, do some reduction if necessary to leave adequate margins, to insure nothing gets lost in further copying and scanning.
Google Earth as Aid in Course Layout: David Katz called attention to Google Earth, available at
http://earth.google.com/ which can be a very useful tool in laying out courses. It includes lots of high resolution imagery, streams images for dynamic zooming, can measure distances and provide elevations. It requires installing software on your computer, currently available only for Windows (2000 or XP) and needs a fairly high-powered PC. Mac users and others who can’t use Google Earth can still use Google Maps at
http://maps.google.com/ which can help in mapping courses although its satellite imagery is much lower resolution, and a couple of tools built on Google Maps: the new America’s Running Routes service from USATF at
www.usatf.org/routes and the somewhat similar Gmaps Pedometer site at
www.gmap-pedometer.com. Also, if you can’t use Google Earth, try the National Map from USGS at
http://nationalmap.gov/ which also includes high resolution imagery and lets you measure distances and obtain elevations. It doesn’t stream and can be rather slow, but it’s totally web based—no software to install on your computer—so can be used from any computer.
Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 12:00.
Minutes prepared by Bob Baumel, RRTC Secretary
