Map of the Month

Are sidewalks allowed? The map does not say they are forbidden. Just looking at the first 4 of the 10 corners on multimap.com's birdseye view, I reckon there would be a saving of about 12 m by cutting across the sidewalk. Some runners and me as a measurer would do that unless it is clear that runners are not permitted to use these sidewalks.

Unless specifically included, US courses exclude shortcuts and sidewalks, and use of the road is curb-to-curb. Nobody I know in the US measures corners on the sidewalk. Specific races include sidewalk portions of the course, but these are specifically noted on the map where applicable.

Fair enough, if that is the understood practice.

In the UK we ask in the summary sheet for a specific statement about "The section of the road available to the runners on the day of the race. Pavements?"
n.b. Pavements in this context are what you call sidewalks.

Perhaps US runners are better behaved than UK ones where it is common to see shortcuts being taken on a corner if there is an inviting piece of pavement. So if the organiser does not agree to explicitly ban it in the race instructions, and preferably also tape it off, then I argue to the race organiser that I should measure on the shortest possible line.

Nowadays I tend to use the aerial pictures and birdseye views when certifying a course to check to see if there are potential issues like this which have not been addressed in the measurement report. I guess I was just intrigued by looking at this map of the month and then wondered what it was like on the ground.

Start and finish are "Even with the cross above the doorway" ??

I would much prefer start and finish marked by nails in the road and measured from a couple of fixed objects. How old fashioned of me.

It had also escaped my attention that the new 5K is 150 meters longer than the old imperial 5K previously used in the dark continent. Must be due to the devaluation of the dollar. I will have to remember to add that to my 5k's in future.

James,I know the Title of the Race is 5k, but it's certified as a 5.15k. The map tells the runners it's distance so at least you know what you are running. This was probably done so the race would have a common start/finish.

Also, have you ever measured a course where they insisted not to use nails or even paint.

You are right, the advertized 5K is not 5K. I don't spouse any harm is done, unless someone was interested in their time.

Going out to the web and downloading the real course map does lead to a bit detective work for the runner, something like a scavenger hunt. I had not thought of spicing my races up like that, interesting idea.

My problem with the start is not the lack nails or paint, it's the vague location of the imaginary start line.
If I wanted to put down a nail or paint, where exactly would I put it?

On a more practical note, let's just say I have a roll of duct tape and wanted to stick it down for the start and finish line. Where exactly, and how many feet from a fixed object, would I put it? Or would finding the start be an exercise in divine interpretation?

This is the second course that has been certified for this event. Neither time has it been 5000 meters. Both times I've asked why. Both times the answer, from two different measurers, was that "that's the way the race director wanted it". Apparently he was (and is) more concerned with where the course started and finished than exactly how long it was.

JamesM,

The map indicates that the Start/Finish is marked with white paint on the curb. You are not expected to rely soley (or, in this case, "souly") on interpretation of straight-out from the cross above the door.

Even when I put nails in the pavement, I still reference a landmark, which may be the "front door of...", or a lampost. There may be nails, but that is only speculation. There is at least a paint marking.

Sorry I missed the prior words about the white paint, I was attempting to locate it by the description on the list of locations.

Even so, the logic remains. Should the paint fade or for some other reason the start mark need re-establishing, there is no measurement or offset from a fixed object that could be used to princely re-establish the point.

The exact location of mile marks is not as important becuase mile marks are not normally certified, but the exact locations of start and finish are.

The measure has provided "excellent" little diagrams of each mile mark, with showing the offset from a clearly marked immovable object. Thus allowing the re-establishment of the mark if it was lost.

What I am pointing out is that the start should have some similar offset measurement that would allow it to be re-established. For example 122'6" from the end of the south curb, or 22'6" S of lamp post number xxxxx.

Otherwise an excellent map.

I will defend teh mapmaker. My guess would be that the doorway is well-defined, and that there is a sidewalk leading towards the road. If the cross is in the middle of the doorway (even if it is offset, it will be easy to position in relation to the center), then the Start/Finish will be in the center of the sidewalk.

As such, that is an easy location to identify. Paint, and even nails, will disappear over time. The first or second time the street is plowed (for snow, as it is Chicago), the nail could be removed.

Parking signs, street signs, and even telephone poles are removed often enough to allow the cross to be considered as permanent as a sign post. Now, if there were a fire hydrant handy...

If the Start/Finish is mis-judged by even a meter, that is still well within the SCPF. No harm, no foul, in my opinon.