Measuring out and back courses.

To measure a course correctly for the runner’s sake should be disregarded. Unless the race director can give you a strong surety about enforcing all possible course restrictions, the whole road should really be used while riding the shortest possible route.

In my experience course restrictions are too often NOT enforced. Many times course restrictions just don’t get put out along the course correctly. When courses are set up correctly, the first 30-50 race leaders might run the restricted course, but soon enough runners are 3-5 or more abreast running outside of those strategically placed restricted areas along the course.

After a race I like to look at photos taken along the race course route. 9 out 10 times when there is a coned lane or turn, runners will be running outside of the restricted area. Locally the Rochester PD expresses an ongoing frustration in controlling runners to restricted courses. It’s a full time job! Runners run where they feel most comfortable. Especially at larger participation races you’ll never see runners in single file. During a race runners will naturally try to avoid pot holes, rough road surfaces, gravel, where the road crowns too much, other runners and badly placed aid stations.

Most runners are NOT running the shortest possible route. They are participating in a race. They are all over the road. Just look at the data from those erroneous GPS measurements runners love to talk about. When was the last time you saw a runner running at 30 cm from the curb?

Isn’t it the humble measurer’s job to try to give the race a course measurement that is at least the advertised race distance?

Kevin is correct about how one runs a course. It is always best to measure the shortest possible route and try to avoid restrictions. This will make the course long for most runners, but it will always be accurate.

As for an out&back course, if they are restricted to traffic as you describe then the whole course must be measured.

I am the RD in question. The turns WILL be coned and evenly measured using a standard radius. We will spray each turn as a guide to the inside edge of the turn. We will also place cones down the center lines of all of the roads. I run the Philadelphia Marathon each year and there is a long section that will be exactly like ours. We will also have volunteers stationed throughout the section described.

While some of you have problems with restrictions on a road course, it has been my experience that the RD wants a fair course and is willing to follow marked restrictions. In one conversation, I was asked about a nail/cone location in a parking lot. The "restriction added about 20 feet to a Marathon length.
I seriously doubt the prudence of using whole road SPR for a race where opposing traffic will be maintained or kept open for safety purposes.

J.A.,

I agree it's tricky to figure out. My experience runs the gamut, from Kevin's observations (the runners are all over the place) to Mike's (some RD's are really conscientious and do a good job of keeping the course as measured).

For me the Marine Corps Marathon falls in the latter category-- they will follow through with all the coning they promise, and set up the course as measured. But even there I occasionally learn that there are areas that are a bit out of control, and the measurements need to adjust to how folks really run the course.

I would say to RD that it is not enough to have cones in all the right places-- you also need to have course marshals in place who can direct the runners and observe whether (or not) the measured course is followed. This applies primarily to spots where disregarding the cones would shorten the course.

I agree with Mike in this-- I'm not a fan of measuring through a part of the road that is going to be closed to the runners.

The trickiest part to define is usually where the runner make left turns (if they are running with traffic). You have to specify points the runners where runners need to be on the right side before and after making the turn. A convenient set of points can be the ends of yellow lines but you don't always have those.

A possible "middle road" between trusting-not trusting could be: maybe RD could agree to have you ride ahead of race and confirm/correct all coning issues-- and maybe get a buddy to ride the course somewhere mid-pack to see how things are proceeding. (Most races don't want bikes out there so you'd need permission and probably a prominent permit on the bikes).

This is why maps must be made accurately! Notations on the map for all restricted areas, or non-restricted. It must be clear, so that course directors can correctly set the course, and runners can determine if the course was set correctly (or if they ran the course correctly).

This is why we encourage road sides indicated, and the road widths exaggerated. With exaggerated road widths, we can map the route as measured, and more-easily show where cones must be placed.

Perhaps nobody does more coning and has more marshals than NYRR and yet I've seen countless runners in the middle of the pack ignore both. Nonetheless when Dave Katz and I measure in Central Park we follow the lane restrictions, since the leaders generally adhere to them.

It depends a lot on the race, right? In the Detroit Turkey Trot I would guess that for at least 50% of the runners, it's the only race they run all year. For that reason they aren't too up on race etiquette, and don't worry too much about the rules. We watched one year at a turn where about 20% of the runners cut through an empty corner lot rather than being bothered with staying on the road. Cones on that course would have been mocked and ridiculed.