Measuring a "Bad" course

I think you've nailed it, Jim.

It's not YOUR course. You're only measuring its length.

That being said, you've probably seen a lot more courses that the race director has, and you have some obligation to let the race director know if he/she is doing something that isn't in the best interest of the sport and/or its participants.

That question may be one for the attorneys. If there was a problem that resulted in legal action, you would be better protected if you did everything a reasonable person would have done as a course measurer. -- Justin

Simple. My name is going to be on the certificate or in the database as measure and I don't want to be associated with any course or race where the course is badly planned.

I like to work with the RD on figuring out the course and it's implications before undertaking measurement.

Do we have enough distance? Is there enough room at the start and during the first mile? Is the start stright for the first bit? Do runners get a view of the finish line before they are right on top of it? Do you make runners go past the barn gate in a finish fake out? Is the start running across the finish line, if so is that OK with the timing company? Is there stable ground where they plan to erect the finish line, and enough room for the finish chute?

Then we get into the more complicated issues, which normally involve traffic. Does the course prevent early finishers from leaving the parking lot? Could the course involve less traffic or home owner disruption? How will the traffic detours work and where will the cars go? Will I get the access to the road that I need for measurement and/or police cover during measurement rides? What else is planned in the city at that time on that day? Will the city allow a permit for this?

Does the route cross a bridge or rail line? What are the conditions of closure?

Do they have the staffing levels to be able to manage the water stops and course marshals on the proposed route, or would an out and back be less stress on their organization?

I want to know how many they think will run the first time, and to what extent they plan to grow. I also want to know who they are going to use for the timing becuase different vendors need different amounts of space.

I even ask things like, 'Are they making use of the bathrooms available?' While this has nothing to do with measurement it helps me gauge if they have a clue, and if they have a hope in hell of starting the event on time.

I also ask if they have considered running the event on one of the existing tried and true venues where there is already a working course, or as is often the case, multiple courses already measured.

Some times people call and just ask how much to measure? But when I ask them some of the other questions they get all defensive and go else where. That's fine by me, my name was not associated with their one time event. I don't do this for the cash.

In all my years of running races I never heard anyone blame the course measurer for the lousy organization of a race.

In fact, in all my years of running races (before I started measuring them) I never heard anyone mention the course measurer at all.

OH, that surprises me. I have been frequently complimented on well designed courses. I have also heard from runners about courses of poor design.

Maybe I get more feedback than other people because I am often directly involved with the events on race day.

It is common for local races to state on the application who measured the course, and sometimes who designed the course. Often the race distributes a copy of the course map with the measures name on it. So I think it's quite common for runners to believe that the man who certified the course and has his name on the map is somehow involved in the course. When the course sucks, they perceive that person to carry some of the responsibility.

I originally got into course design and measurement because of a couple of incidents with courses that had been measured in ways that caused runners and cars to get mixed up.

In once case the RD got mad when the volenteers on the course wanted to shift the lane runners were in for safety reasons, but the RD did not because it was then no longer the certified course. The certified route was mad and the difference was only a matter of a few feet, on a 1/2 marathon. That made me look deeper into issues with course design and measurement. Now I is one.

Just like when the timing is all messed up they blame the timing company, even though it may be the fault of the data entry done by the race or mistakes by the volenteers giving out chips. If the course blows you get tared with the same brush.

I think, as people with experience and expertise in matters to do with course design and measurement, we owe it to the sport to do what we can to guide RD's to make logical choices about the courses we measure.

After all, we are probably the last people who are going to seriously look at the course, and go over the entire course, prior to setting it in stone. Sometimes I find I am the first person to have seriously looked at the entire course on the ground, and not just from a map or a drive through the neighborhood.

Most measurer's are runners and understand exactly what Jame's has said. However, I've told the RD what I feel is best for the runners and they have ignored my plea.

I don't think the measurer is blamed for a poor course design, however I feel most measurer's try to encourage a RD to do it a certain way.

Good point, James. I get lots of questions from participants on race day about the accuracy of a course/timing, scoring or a race...especially when things go south. Often it's an event for which I haven't measured the course, or have any link. I can only shrug my shoulders and walk on.

It's more frustrating when I do measure a course, mark mile splits, etc., and find the split timers are at the location they stood for years on the "inaccurate" course. Oh, or when the RD decides to place the start/finish where they please in a different location.

Even when someone knows I measured a course they don't like, they don't blame me unless they think it was too long or too short. If there were too many hills or turns, or it went through a bad part of town, or if there weren't enough water stops in the race, no one says "Why did you measure such a bad course?"

If you start taking on other roles, then I imagine you do get compliments or complaints. But if you stick to just measuring the course, people don't tend to blame you for that turn right before the finish. I'm not saying that we shouldn't get involved with other parts of running the race. I'm just saying that if all you do is measure the course, you don't get blamed for stuff that goes wrong. At least that's my experience. But in James' situation, where his name goes in the race literature even when all he does is measure the course, it may be different. Most people around here have no clue who measures the courses.

I measured a course last year that was generally considered to be one of the worst-designed layouts in the history of the sport - so bad that it elicited dozens of posts on LetsRun.com afterward.

The RD knew it was bad, too, but the big-bucks sponsor demanded that the course be run that way. I'm sure the organizers took a lot more heat than anyone else. It did give me good fodder for my talk on course design at the Road Race Management meeting that autumn.

Got you, Mark.

I took on measuring courses in the area because most of the courses were questionable in length, uncertified, measured with wheels, and so forth.

Most of the top-shelf runners know which courses I measured, and I developed a good reputation. Some of the local race directors know of my work, too.

I might have a course that's as bad as Jim mentioned, too...because the RD wanted the race to finish in a specific location...putting a railroad crossing within the first 50 meters of the start.